V,Bzf!fl^LF 


^   ^   iiS   t4 


/ 


The  Political  Theories 

of 

P.  J.  Proudhon 


*         ,      '    ,  •>  .     o  •      '  •   .,   ,^     *     )     '      '        '  > 

1..,.,  I.  ■>)'■,'>      3,1 

>        1     1  '     >    >     '    3 


BY 

S.  Y.  LU,  B.S.,  M.A. 


'I 


Submitted  in  Partial  Fulfilment  of  the  Requirements  for 

THE  Degree  of  Doctor  of  Philosophy  in  the  Faculty 

OF  Political  Science,  Columbia  University 


NEW  YORK 

M.  R.  Gray^  Inc.,  461  Eighth  Ave. 
1922 


*  •    «  «     • 


exchamgS 


To 

My  Friend 

S.  Ma 


PREFACE. 

Proudhon's  published  works  fill  thirty-six  volumes  and  his 
correspondence  brings  the  total  up  to  fifty  volumes.  In  view  of 
the  dearth  of  studies  of  Proudhon  in  the  English  language,  the 
author  has  tried  to  analyze  chronologically  and  to  explain  rather 
extensively  the  development  of  his  philosophical  thought  in 
general  and  his  political  thought  in  particular,  indicating  modi- 
fications and  contradictions. 

The  author  wishes  to  acknowledge  his  profound  indebtedness 
to  his  friends,  Mr.  King  Chu  and  Mr.  H.  C.  Wang,  for  their 
constant  advice,  to  Professor  William  A.  Dunning,  Professor 
Howard  Lee  McBain,  Professor  Carlton  J.  H.  Hayes  and  Pro- 
fessor Franklin  Henry  Giddings,  from  whose  works  and  lectures 
he  obtained  much  valuable  assistance ;  but  especially  to  Professor 
William  A.  Dunning  and  Professor  Carlton  J.  H.  Hayes,  under 
whose  inspiring  direction  this  work  was  conducted. 

S.  Y.  Lu. 


/:73361 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  I 

Historical  Background. 

Page 

( 1 )  The  Economic  Background   8 

(a)  Agriculture  9 

(b)  Industry  12 

(c)  Commerce  16 

(2)  The  Social  Background  17 

(a)  The  decline  of  the  old  privileged  orders : 

(x)  The  nobility 
(y)  The  clergy 

(b)  The  growth  of  the  middle  and  lower  classes: 

(x)  The  peasantry  19 

(y)  The  bourgeoisie  19 

(z)  The  proletariat  21 

(3)  The  Political  Background  24 

(a)  The  Revolution 

(b)  The  First  Empire 

(c)  The  Restoration 

(d)  The  July  Monarchy 

(e)  The  Second  Republic 

(f)  The  Second  Empire 

(4)  The  Philosophical  Background  27 

(a)  The  revolutionary  school — Rosseau  28 

(b)  The  traditionalist  school — Chateaubriand,  De  Maistre,  De 

Bonald  and  Lamennais  29 

(c)  The    socialists — St.    Simon,    Fourier,    Cabet    and    Loviis 

Blanc 31 

CHAPTER  n 
Proudhon's  Life. 

(1)  The  period  of  boyhood  and  youth  (1809-1836)   39 

(2)  The  period  of  mature  intellectual  activity  (1837-1865) 40 

(a)  Proudhon  as  an  anarchist   (1840-1865) 41 

(b)  Proudhon  as  a  federalist  (1862-1865) 49 


vi  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

CHAPTER  III 
Protidhon's  General  Philosophical  Ideas 

Page 

(1)  The  supremacy  of  economics  over  politics 50 

(2)  Progress    51 

(3)  Liberty      52 

(4)  Equality      55 

(5)  Justice    61 

CHAPTER  IV 
Proudhon's  theory  of  the  state  from  the  standpoint  of  an  anarchist 

descriptive. 

( 1 )  Origin  of  the  State 65 

(a)  The  family  65 

(b)  The  tribe 65 

(c)  The  city   66 

(d)  The  state    66 

(2)  Definition  of  state  and  of  government 66 

(3)  Development  of  the  state  68 

(a)  The  development  of  its  ideas 68 

(x)  The  idea  of  necessity   68 

(y)  The  idea  of  providence 71 

(z)  The  idea  of  justice  73 

(2)  The  development  of  its  forms  75 

(x)  The  old  regime — monarchy,  aristocracy  and 

democracy      75 

(y)  The  new  regime — anarchy 77 

CHAPTER  V 
Proudhon's  Theory  of  the  State  from  the  Standpoint  of  an  Anarchist — 

Critical. 

( 1 )  As  to  state  and  government  in  general  78 

(2)  As  to  the  different  forms  of  government 81 

(a)  His  criticism  of  absolute  monarchy 85 

(b)  His  criticism  of  repreesntative  government 85 

(x)  His  criticism  of  constitutional  monarchy 87 

(y)  His  criticism  of  democracy  or  direct  government 

in  its  moderate  form    88 

(z)  His  criticism  of  direct  government  in  its  radical 

form      90 

(3)  As  to  the  institutions  of  the  state 90 

(a)  His  criticism  of  law  90 

(b)  His  criticism  of  the  judiciary 91 

(c)  His  criticism  of  taxation   93 

(d)  His  criticism  of  public  functionaries   93 


Contents  vii 

CHAPTER  VI 

Proudhon's  Theory  of  the  state  from  the  standpoint 

of  an  anarchist — creative. 

Page 

(1)  Why  anarchy  is  preferred  by  Proudhon  to  the  other  forms  of 

government     95 

(a)  Anarchy  is  the  regime  of  justice;  all  the  other  forms 

of  government  are  the  regime  of  power. 

(b)  In  anarchy,  public  power  is  exercised  by  all  the  citizens 

indepently  of   each  other;   in  all   the  other  forms  of 
government  it  is  the  attribute  of  the  public  functionaries. 

(2)  How  can  anarchy  be  realized ?  96 

(a)  Through  the  revolution  of  ideas  97 

(b)  Through  the  revolution  of  ideas    97 

(b)  Through  education    97 

(c)  Through  economic  revolution 98 

(d)  Through  social  revolution  102 

(e)  Through  political   revolution   105 

(3)  What  are  the  general  characteristics  of  anarchy?    112 

(a)  Anarchy,  the  absence  of  master,  of  sovereign  (1840)   ...  113 

(b)  Anarchy,  the  real  formula  of  the  republic  (1848-1849)..  113 

(c)  Anarchy  in  its  purest  form   (1851)    116 

(d)  Anarchy  and  the  state   (1858)    118 


CHAPTER  VII 

Proudhon' s  theory  of  the  state  from  the  standpoint  of  a  federalist 

(1862-1865) 

( 1 )  The  change  of  his  basic  ideas 122 

(a)  Anarchy,  the  negation  of  authority  and  the  affirmation 
of  liberty 

(2)  Classification  of  the  forms  of  government 124 

(a)  The  government  of  theory  or  a  priori  government 

(x)  The  regime  of  authority 

( i)  Monarchy     124 

(ii)  Communism   124 

(y)  The  regime  of  liberty  125 

(  i)  Democracy    125 

(ii)  Anarchy      125 

(b)  The  government  of  fact  or  mixed  government 126 


viii  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

CHAPTER  VII— (Continued) 
(3)  Federalism 

(a)  Geographical    127 

(b)  Political     128 

(c)  Economic      135 

(d)  Social     136 

(e)  Educational      138 

CHAPTER  VIII 
Conclusion 

(1)  Proudhon's  theory  of  nationalism  and  patriotism 140 

(2)  His  influence  upon  anarchism,  social  radicalism  and  syndicalism       141 

(3)  General  criticism  of  his  work 141 

(a)  Change  of  ideas  and  confusion  of  terms 

(b)  Destructive  rather  than  constructive 

(c)  Ideal  rather  than  practical 

APPENDIX 

(1)  Proudhon's  Life  144 

(2)  Proudhon's  theory  of  logic 146 

(3)  Statistics 

Table  a: — The   development  of  agriculture   in   France   from   1789 

to  1865 
Table  b: — The  growth  of  industry  in  France  from  1789  to  1865 
Table  c: — The  growth  of  commerce  in  France  from  1789  to  1869 
Table  d: — The  increase  of  the  number  of  workingmen  in  France 

from  1789  to  1865 
Bibliography       149 


CHAPTER  I. 

Pierre  Joseph  Proudhon  was  the  father  of  anarchism.^  Living 
between  1809  and  1865,  his  genius  was  given  ample  opportunity 
to  function.  France,  Hke  the  rest  of  Europe,  was  then  in  the 
throes  of  one  revolution  after  another.  He  was  bom  in  a  revo- 
lution, the  great  revolution,  which  had  its  spectacular  close  with 
Napoleon's  defeat  at  Waterloo  when  Proudhon  was  barely  seven 
years  of  age.  At  twenty-one,  the  revolution  of  1830  found  him 
poverty-stricken,  travelling  many  weary  miles  on  foot  from  city 
to  city,  in  quest  of  work.^  Then  came  the  revolution  of  1848, 
with  the  beginning  of  which  Proudhon,  already  a  well-known 
literary  figure  because  of  his  "What  is  Property?"  which  had 
appeared  in  1840,  began  his  first  newspaper  venture.^  And  before 
he  passed  away,  he  witnessed  the  radical  agitation  of  I860,*  as 
an  exile  in  Belgium;  an  exile  from  which  he  did  not  return  to 
France  until  1862,  until  after  the  special  imperial  act  of  1860, 
supplementing  the  Amnesty  of  1859,  had  been  promulgated,  par- 
doning those  who  had  committed  moral  as  well  as  political 
crimes.^ 

Proudhon  wielded  a  vitriolic  pen  against  everything  and 
everybody.  He  agreed  with  nothing  and  nobody.  He  attacked 
Rousseau.  He  criticized  De  Bonald.  He  denounced  and  even 
ridiculed  the  theories  of  St.  Simon,  Fourier  and  Louis  Blanc. 
There  was  no  escaping  his  pen. 

Of  course,  this  did  not  go  on  with  impunity.  During  the 
short  period  of  the  three  years  between  1847  and  1850,  the  four 

1  Maurice  Lair,  "Annales  des  sciences  politiques,"  15  September,  1909, 
p.  588. 

2  Lagarde,  p.  11.     Desjardin,  p.  14. 
3Diehl,  pp.  37-39. 

4  Hayes:  Vol.  II,  pp.  175-180. 

5  Miilberger— P.  J.  Proudhon.  pp.  200  and  211. 


S  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

papers  with  which  he  was  successively  connected  were  success- 
ively suppressed  by  the  government  as  being  anarchistic  and 
obnoxious.'*  Of  the  many  books  he  wrote,  most  were  seized 
by  the  government  the  moment  they  came  from  the  presses 
and  suppressed.  And  not  a  little  of  his  life  was  spent  in  prison, 
as  well  as  in  exile,  because  of  the  views  he  so  vigorously  enter- 
tained and  so  strenuously  championed,'^ 

But  whether  at  liberty,  in  prison  or  in  exile,  it  made  little 
difference  to  him.  He  waged  an  incessant  war  against  the  state, 
the  government,  and  the  various  institutions  of  society.  Nothing 
and  nobody  could  stop  him.  His  criticism  was  keen.  His  writings 
were  forceful.  His  style  was  entertaining,  with  its  ridicule  and 
sarcasm.  Yet  his  ideas  were  frequently  contradictory  and  in- 
consistent, and  just  as  frequently  profoundly  vague.  But  always 
he  was  ingenious  and  original. 

The  contradictions  and  inconsistencies  in  his  theories  need 
to  be  carefully  watched,  or  else  one  can  become  entirely  misled. 
Not  infrequently  he  championed  a  view  he  had  formerly  de- 
nounced, and  denounced  one  he  had  before  that  time  bravely 
championed.  Indeed,  at  the  very  end,  he  abandoned  anarchy, 
which  he  had  championed  nearly  all  of  his  eventful  life,  and 
championed  federalism,  which  he  had  formerly  ignored.  But  so 
powerful  was  his  prolific  pen,  that  he  stands  out  today  as  one  of 
the  greatest  writers  that  France  had  in  the  Nineteenth  Centur}\ 

1.    The  Economic  Background 

By  the  time  Proudhon  began  his  work,  numerous  changes  had 
already  been  brought  about  in  France,  by  the  great  revolution 
and  the  revolution  of  1830,  economic,  social,  political,  and  philo- 
sophical. It  was  with  these  new  conditions  that  Proudhon  labored. 
Rightly  to  understand  his  attitude  and  theories  it  will,  of  course, 
first  be  necessary  to  take  a  rapid  survey  of  what  these  conditions 
actually  were,  and  what  led  up  to  them. 

8  Diehl :  pp.  37-39. 
^  See  infra,  Ch.  II. 


The  Economic  Background  9 

In  a  general  way,  France  shows  marked  economic  develop- 
ments, between  1789  and  Proudhon's  time.  Its  agriculture  had 
increased.  So  had  its  commerce.  As  had  also  its  industry. 
Proudhon  must  have  noticed  that  with  the  possible  exception  of 
agriculture,  all  this  increase  benefitted  only  the  bourgeoisie  who 
controlled  industry  and  commerce,  rather  than  the  proletariat 
who  worked  for  the  bourgeoisie.  Certain  it  is,  he  did  not  fail 
to  grasp  the  significance  of  this  situation,  for  he  spent  his 
energies  and  exercised  his  pen  for  the  express  purpose  of  bringing 
about  an  economic  revolution — a  revolution  so  complete  and  far- 
reaching  that  thereafter  there  would  be  no  distinction  between 
the  rich  and  the  poor,  for  there  would  be  no  rich  and  no  poor, 
and  no  distinction  between  capitalist  and  workman,  for  there 
would  be  no  such  two  classes ;  all  would  be  producers— everybody 
would  have  to  work  and  produce.^  Let  us  now  see  just  what 
it  was 'that  led  him  to  this  view,  by  considering  (a)  the  develop- 
ment of  agriculture,  (b)  the  development  of  industry,  and  (c) 
the  development  of  commerce, 
(a)  Agriculture 

The  development  of  agriculture  presents  three  principal 
phases:  (1)  The  emancipation  of  the  rural  laborer  through  the 
abolition  of  all  survivals  of  feudalism  and  serfdom;  (2)  the 
liberation  of  agriculture  from  the  ancient,  legal  and  traditional 
fetters,  and  (3)  the  opening  of  land  to  the  possession  of  large 
numbers  of  people. 

The  first  distinct  service  which  the  National  Assembly  of 
1789  rendered  to  mankind  in  general,  and  to  agriculture  in 
particular,  was  the  abolition  of  serfdom.®  Through  the  general 
decree  of  August  4,  1789,  and  the  articles  of  August  11,  1789, 
the  Assembly  abolished  feudal  rights  and  personal  servitude.^" 
In   "The  Declaration  of  the  Rights  of   Man,"   the  Assembly 

*  For  details  of  the  proposed  economic  revolution,  see  Chaps.  VI  and 
VII,  infra. 

®  For  the  emancipation  of  serfs  in  the  12th  and  13th  centuries,  see 
Levasseur,  "Histoire  .  .  .  avant  1789,"  pp.  888-889. 

^°  Levasseur,  "Histoire  ...  a  1870,"  I,  p.  10 ;  Lavergne,  p.  5. 


10  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

declared  that  all  men  were  bom,  and  would  remain,  free  and 
equal,  and  that  social  distinction  could  be  founded  only  upon 
common  usefulness.^^ 

No  less  important  than  the  abolition  of  serfdom  was  the 
liberation  of  agriculture.  By  the  law  of  1791,  the  legislative 
assembly  liberated  the  land  of  France.  The  proprietors  were, 
henceforth,  free  to  cultivate  their  land  in  whatever  way  they 
chose,  and  to  dispose  of  their  products  in  whatever  place  they 
preferred.^^ 

But  the  most  significant  of  all,  was  the  wide  distribution  of 
landownership.  '  There  was,  to  be  sure,  a  large  number  of 
small  land  proprietors  before  the  revolution,  as  was  observed  by 
Arthur  Young  and  Necker.^^  This  number,  however,  was  per- 
ceptibly increased  after  1789.  Moved  by  the  idea  of  equality 
and  liberty,  the  National  Assembly  confiscated  the  estates  of  the 


11  Levasseur,  "Histoire  ...  a  1870"  I,  p.  15.  This  was  voted  by  the 
Assembly  on  August  20,  22  and  23,  1789  and  sanctioned  by  the  king  in 
October,  1789. 

12  Lavergne,  p.  10. 
The  Law  of  1791. 

Art.  1.  "Le  territoire  de  la  France  dans  toute  son  etendue,  est  libre 
comme  les  personnes  qui  I'habitent. 

Art.  2.  "Les  proprietaires  sont  libres  de  varier  a  leur  gre  la  culture 
et  I'exploitation  de  leur  terres,  de  conserver  a  leur  gre  leur  recoltes  et 
de  disposer  de  toutes  les  productions  de  leur  propriete  dans  I'interieur  du 
royaume  et  au  dehors,  sans  prejudicicr  aux  droits  d'autrui  et  en  se  con- 
formant aux  lois." 

See  also  Lavergne,  pp.  12-13. 

13  "Le  nombre  des  petits  proprietaires  est  si  prodigieux,"  disait  Arthur 
Young  en  1789,  "que  je  crois  bien  qu'il  comprend  un  tiers  du  royaume." 
"II  y  a  en  France"  ecrivait  en  meme  temps  Necker,  "une  immensite  de 
petites  proprietes  rurales."  Lavergne,  pp.  24-25.  According  to  Sugenheim, 
one-third  of  the  land  of  France  before  the  outbreak  of  the  revolution  was 
in  the  possession  of  small  land-owners.    Sugenheim,  pp.  182-183. 


The  Economic  Background  ii 

clergy^*  and  nobility^^  and  divided  them  among  a  broader  con- 
stituency. As  a  safeguard  one  of  the  articles  of  August  11,  1789, 
prohibited  the  accumulation  of  incomes  beyond  the  amount  of 
3,000  livres.^®  According  to  Mr,  Rubichon,  the  land  was  so  well 
distributed  in  1815,  that  there  were  no  less  than  3,805,000  families 
which  possessed  on  an  average  about  twelve  hectares  each,  or 
approximately  twenty-five  acres.^'^ 

After  1815,  the  land  was  still  more  greatly  distributed.  If 
we  analyze  the  quota  of  land  tax  of  1860,  we  find  that  one-third 
of  the  total  amount  of  taxation  was  paid  by  the  great  land 
owners,  one-third  by  the  average  land  owners  and  one-third  by 
the  small  land  owners.  We  may  deduce  from  this  fact  the  actual 
distribution  of  land  in  1860  to  have  been  as  follows: 
50,000  great  land  owners  possessing  in  average  300 

hectares    15  million  h. 

500,000  average  land  owners  possessing  in  average 

30  hectares    15  million  h. 

5,000,000  small  land  owners  possessing  in  average  3 

hectares    15  million  h. 

Total 45  million  hectares^^ 

1*  Through  the  Act  of  November  2,  1789,  the  property  of  the  church 
was  at  the  disposition  of  the  state.  And  again  through  the  decree  of 
April  14,  1790,  the  administration  of  the  property  of  the  church  was  trans- 
ferred to  the  separate  assemblies  of  the  departments.  Lavergne,  p.  19. 
Lavergne  was  strongly  opposed  to  this  measure.  "By  this  act,"  says  he, 
"we  substitute  for  the  clergy  an  equal  number  of  the  bourgeoisie  possess- 
ing land  under  another  form."    Lavergne,  p.  25. 

1^  "La  somme  des  domaines  confisques  sur  les  emigres,  les  deportes  et 
les  condamnes  revolutionnairement  etait  enorme  a  I'origine;  elle  egalait 
presque  la  valeur  des  proprietes  ecclesiastiques  au  deux  ou  trois  milliards. 
En  y  ajoutant  les  domaines  de  la  couronne,  la  totalite  des  terres  de  diverse 
origine  mises  en  vente  a  la  fois  comprenait  un  tiers  du  territoire.  II  n'en 
a  ete  vendu  en  realite  que  pour  un  milliard,  exactment  987,  819,  968  f  r.  96 
c.  et  la  plus  grande  partie  de  ce  milliard  a  ete  restituee  aux  ayants  droits 
par  la  loi  d'indemnite  du  17  Avril  1825  ...  La  depossession  reelle  n'a  pas 
depasse  300  ou  400  millions."     Lavergne,  p.  27. 

16  Lavergne,  p.  11. 

17  Ibid,  pp.  51-53. 

18  Lavergne,  p.  53,  with  the  exception  of  the  property  of  the  state  and 
the  commune  and  those  lands  which  are  not  subject  to  tax. 


12  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

(b)  Industry 

Broadly  speaking,  the  development  of  industry  in  France  from 
1789  to  1865  may  be  divided  into  two  periods:  (1)  domestic 
industry  (1789-1833)  and  (2)  factory  industry  (1833-1865). 
Although  many  important  manufactures  were  established  before 
1833,  the  industry  of  France  still  remained  as  before  1789,  con- 
stituted for  the  great  part  in  little  workshops  where  the  work 
was  entirely  done  by  hand.^®  It  was  only  after  1833,  that  factory 
industry  began  to  develop  on  a  large  scale,  with  a  corresponding 
decline  in  domestic  industry,  which  soon  disappeared  almost  en- 
tirely.2° 

At  the  end  of  the  ancien  regime,  the  industry  of  France  was 
in  a  state  of  progress.  Manufacturers  had  increased  in  number 
in  the  Eighteenth  Century.  Some  of  them  began  to  employ 
machines,  moved  either  by  horses  or  by  hydraulic  wheels.  During 
the  revolution  social  organization  underwent  a  great  change. 
Many  of  the  nobles  were  obliged  to  emigrate  to  the  interior. 
The  population  of  the  cities  diminished.  Industry  languished.^^ 
In  woolen  industry,  for  instance,  the  total  number  of  pieces 
produced  annually  at  the  end  of  the  old  regime  was  2,606,977, 
and  in  the  year  III  (1795)  802,408.  Instead  of  68,416  work- 
shops employing  594,911  workers,  there  were  only  35,820  work- 
shops employing  320,874  workers. ^^ 

Under  the  Consulate  and  the  First  Empire,  the  development 
of  industry  was  greatly  encouraged  by  the  government.^^ 
Napoleon  once  said  to  Oberkampf,  a  well-known  manufacturer 
of  printed  calico,  "You  and  I  make  war  with  England,  but  your 
war  is  the  best."''*  Lyons  employed  12,700  weavers  before  the 
crisis  of  1812;  Tours,  Nimes,  Avignon  employed  altogether 
20,000  weavers  in  the  silk  industry.     Rheims,  too,  entered  into 

"  Levasseur  "Histoire  ...  a  1870,"  II,  p.  841. 
20/fetd:  II,  p.  842. 

21  Ihid:  II.  p.  839.     See  also  I,  pp.  280-283. 

22  Ibid  I,  pp.  260-267.    See  also  I,  pp.  405-406. 
"  Ihid:  I,  pp.  399-401 ;  II,  pp  839-840. 
2*/6."3;  I,  p.  421. 


The  Economic  Background  13 

a  period  of  progress.  In  1810,  it  not  only  manufactured  as  many 
articles  of  cloth  as  in  1789,  but  also  furnished  to  commerce 
400,000  ells  of  fancy  cloth  and  32,800  shawls,  the  total  value  of 
which  was  no  less  than  three  and  a  half  million  francs.^^  The 
Continental  blockade  (1806-1814),  the  Russian  expedition,  and 
the  campaign  of  1813  had,  however,  disastrous  effects  upon 
industry.  After  1810,  manufacturing  in  France  fell  into  a  state 
of  decline  which  grew  worse  in  the  beginning  of  the  Restoration. 
On  one  hand  it  suffered  from  the  keen  competition  of  England. 
On  the  other,  it  suffered  from  the  occupation  of  territory  by  the 
armies  of  the  enemy.  But  at  the  end  of  1818,  when  the  liberation 
of  territory  was  accomplished,  industry  resumed  its  normal 
development.  More  than  600  manufacturers  were  equipped  with 
steam  engines.^® 

After  the  revolution  of  July,  1830,  industry  again  declined. 
This  time  the  government  found  it  necessary  to  come  to  its  help 
by  lending  to  it  thirty  millions  of  francs.  It  was  only  in  1833 
that  the  ascending  movement  of  industry  began  to  manifest  itself 
anew.  Workshops  were  restored,  new  manufactures  founded, 
while  production  and  speculation  again  came  into  full  activity. 
The  consumption  of  pit  coal  was  tripled,  that  of  cast  iron  was 
raised  to  60,000  tons,  machines  became  widely  used,  and  the 
number  of  horse-power  was  doubled. 

After  the  revolution  of  1848,  France  again  suffered  an  in- 
dustrial crisis.  Almost  all  the  workshops  were  emptied ;  in  Paris, 
half  of  the  workers  became  idle;  it  was  the  same  in  most  of 
the  cities  of  the  departments.  But  the  dictatorship  of  Louis 
Napoleon 'after  the  coup  d'Etat  of  1851,  assured  confidence  in 
industry.  Railways  were  developed  and  industry  again  showed 
a  progressive  tendency.  The  production  of  pit  coal  was  increased 
from  five  millions  of  tons  in  1852  to  twelve  and  a  half  millions 
in  1869;  that  of  cast  iron  increased  in  an  almost  equal  pro- 
portion.^^ 

25  Levasseur,  "Histoire  ...  a  1870,"  I,  p.  406. 

26  7fczJ;  II,  pp.  840-841. 

27  Ibid:  II,  p.  841-844. 


14  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

The  principal  causes  of  the  development  of  industry  in  France 
from  1789  to  1865  were  threefold:  (1)  The  liberation  of  in- 
dustry; (2)  the  development  of  science,  and,  in  consequence,  the 
increase  of  invention,  and  (3)  the  introduction  of  machines. 

In  1789,  the   National  Assembly  declared  that  no  vocation 
should  be  prohibited  to  anyone.     Every  individual  could  manu- 
facture, sell  and  transport  whatever  kinds  of  products  he  chose.^^ 
In   the   constitution   of   September    14  of   the   same   year,   the 
Assembly  also  stated  that  all  the  citizens  would  be  admitted  to 
all  the  phases  of  employment  without  any  distinction  except  that 
of  virtue  and  talent.^^  On  March  17,  1791,  the  National  Assembly 
enacted  a  measure,  stipulating  that  on  and  after  April  1st  follow- 
ing, every  individual  should  be  free  to  exercise  any  craft  or  pro- 
fession whatever,  provided  only  that  he  should  equip  himself 
wtih  a  license  from  the  public  authorities  and  should  comply  with 
the  police  regulations,  one  of  which  in  effect  prohibited  all  com- 
binations of  workingmen.     The  guilds  were  not  expressly  abol- 
ished, but  their  monopolistic  powers  and  their  other  privileges 
were  terminated  and  the  guilds  were  left  without  reason  for 
existence.    They  now  rapidly  disappeared.^"    In  the  constitution 
of    tlie    year  III    (1795),    the    National    Convention    declared 
emphatically  that  there  should  be  no  privilege,  no  mastership, 
no  wardship,  no  limitation  to  the  liberty  of  the  press,  of  com- 
merce, of  industry  and  of  the  arts.^^ 

With  the  liberation  of  industry,  the  French  industrial  revolu- 
tion was  further  accelerated  by  the  development  of  science.    "We 

28  Ibid:  I.  p.  85.  Article  18  of  the  Declaration  of  the  Rights  of  Man. 

2^  Ibid:  I.  p.  15.     (See  also  I.  pp.  10-11.) 

30  Levasseur  "Histoire  ...  a  1870,"  I.  pp.  22-23.  La  loi  du  17  Mars 
1791,  Article  7.  "A  compter  du  1  Avril  prochain,  il  sera  libre  a  toute 
personne  de  faire  tel  negoce  ou  d'exercer  telle  profession,  art  ou  metier 
qu'elle  trouvera  bon;  mais  elle  sera  tenue  de  pourvoir  auparavant  d'une 
patente,  d'en  acquitter  le  prix,  suivant  les  taux  ci-apres  determines  et  de  se 
conformer  aux  reglements  de  police  qui  sont  ou  pourront  etre  faits." 
For  the  re-establishment  of  the  guild  of  bakers  in  1801  and  that  of  butchers 
in  1800-1803,  see  Levasseur,  op.  cit.,  I,  pp.  332-337. 
31  Ibid:  I,  p.  85. 


The  Economic  Background  15 

ought,"  said  Castaz,  in  his  report  of  1819,  "to  place  in  the  first 
rank  the  progress  of  the  exact  sciences  and  the  numerous  dis- 
coveries made  during  the  last  thirty  years  in  physics,  mechanics 
and  chemistry.  These  discoveries  almost  determined  the  creation 
or  the  perfection  of  many  branches  of  industry. ^^ 

The  development  of  science  brought  with  it  a  new  era  of 
experimentation  and  progress.  One  of  its  striking  features  was 
the  stimulus  it  gave  to  the  spirit  of  invention.  From  the  very 
beginning  of  the  movement  there  was  a  steady  increase  in  the 
annual  number  of  patents  that  the  government  granted. 

Under  the  Consulate  and  the  First  Empire,  no  more  than  100 
patents  had  been  granted  any  single  year.  But  in  the  period  of 
the  Restoration  (1815-1830)  the  annual  average  granted  reached 
250  patents,  and  one  year  the  number  was  452  patent  grants, 
whereas  during  the  Constitutional  Monarchy  of  Louis  Philippe 
(1830-1848)  the  steady  pace  of  increase  continued  by  leaps  and 
bounds.  In  1834,  already  the  number  of  grants  was  576  patents. 
By  1843,  the  spirit  of  invention  had  so  spread  that  during  the 
year  1,838  patents  were  granted.  And  in  1844,  following  the 
enactment  of  the  Reform  Law  of  that  year,  there  were  no  less 
than  2,158  patents  granted.^^ 

No  less  important  than  the  development  of  science  was  the 
introduction  of  machinery.  In  1804,  a  certain  Englishman, 
Douglas,  established  a  factory  on  the  Island  of  Cygnes  for  the 
manufacture  of  macGines,  selling  not  less  than  340  of  them  to 
the  French  drapers.  Besides  Douglas,  the  Perier  Bros.,  John 
Collier,  Albert  Colla  and  Salneuve  also  manufactured  various 
kinds  of  machines.^^  In  1810,  there  were  only  one  high  pressure 
steam  engine  and  fifteen  or  more  low  pressure  steam  engines 
being  used  by  the  manufacturers  for  the  raising  of  water.^^  In 
1830,  there  were  616  steam  engines  with  10,000  horse-power;  in 
1847,   4,853   steam  engines   with  61,630  horse-power,   and    in 

32  Ihid:  I,  p.  626. 
^^Ihid:  II,  p.  163. 
34/fcfd:  I.  pp.  414-415. 
35  IhTd:  I,  pp.  413-424. 


i6  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

1870,  five  years  after  Proudhon's  death,  32,827  steam  engines 
with  871  million  horse-power.^® 
(c)  Commerce 

Toward  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Louis  XVI  (1765-1793),  that 
is,  prior  to  the  outbreak  of  the  great  revolution,  commerce  had 
increased,  and  had  surpassed,  one  thousand  millions  of  francs  per 
year.  From  1789  'to  1799,  it  greatly  diminished,  being  tram- 
melled by  civil  War,  by  social  transformation,  by  foreign  wars, 
by  the  act  of  navigation  and  by  the  continental  blockade.  In 
1799  the  general  commerce  of  France  fell  to  five  hundred  mil- 
lions.^'' 

From  1800  to  1806,  the  commerce  of  France  returned  to  a 
period  of  normal  development.  The  third  coalition  had  been 
broken  by  the  crushing  victory  of  Austerlitz.  The  administration 
of  the  government  had  been  organized.  Finally,  the  protective 
tariff  of  1806,  directed  particularly  against  England,  replaced  that 
of  1791,  which  had  been  very  liberal.  Industry  developed.  Com- 
merce increased  on  an  average  of  fifty-five  millions  of  francs  per 
year. 

But  from  1808,  the  situation  underwent  a  complete  change. 
The  evil  effect  of  the  continental  blockade,  the  war  of  Spain, 
the  disaster  of  Trafalgar,  and  the  closing  of  the  sea  to  France 
by  England,  all  impeded  the  development  of  commerce.  From 
1808  to  1814,  the  total  amount  of  commerce  diminished  in  average 
forty-three  millions  per  year.  After  1815  the  commerce  of 
France  followed  an  ascending  scale.  In  spite  of  the  protective 
and  prohibitive  tariff  laws,  seven  in  number,  enacted  from  1814  to 
1826,  its  growth  was  very  rapid.  The  total  increase  of  general 
commerce  between  1815  and  1847  was  1,719  millions;  that  of 
special  commerce  731  millions.  The  average  increase  of  general 
commerce  per  year  was  fifty-six  millions ;  and  that  of  special 
commerce  twenty-three  millions. 

From  1847,  the  year  of  dearth,  to  1850,  the  political  troubles 
under  the  Second  Republic  again  retarded  the  progress  of  com- 

s«/6id;  II,  pp.  163,  546,  461. 

37  Levasseur,  "Histoire  du  Commerce  de  la  France,"  II.  pp.  821-822. 


The  Economic  Background  17 

merce  temporarily.  But  very  soon,  it  again  assumed  its  normal 
development.  According  to  the  statistics,  there  was  an  annual 
average  increase  of  sixty-one  millions  per  year  in  special  com- 
merce.^^ 

The  period  between  1852  and  1859  was  especially  a  period  of 
rapid  growth  for  commerce.  The  protective  tariff  was  still  in 
vogue.  But  it  was  greatly  modified  by  a  number  of  decrees. 
The  condition  of  the  commercial  market  was  transformed  com- 
pletely by  the  construction  of  a  series  of  railways,  of  electric 
telegraphs  and  by  the  establishment  of  sound  credit.  The  first 
half  of  the  Second  Empire  was,  therefore,  very  prosperous.  The 
total  amount  of  general  commerce  was  increased  to  2,859  milUons 
being  an  average  of  317  millions  per  year.  The  total  amount  of 
special  commerce  was  also  increased  to  3,048  millions,  being 
an  average  of  228  millions  per  year. 

The  second  half  of  the  Empire  (1859-1870),  which  proved  to 
be  a  liberal  regime,  was  inaugurated  by  the  treaty  of  commerce 
of  January  1860  with  England.  Through  this  treaty,  the  protec- 
tive tariff  was  abandoned  and  a  maximtmi  amount  of  25%  duty 
on  imported  articles  was  agreed  upon.  But  unfortunately,  the 
political  condition  of  France  after  1860  became  less  favorable  to 
trade.  The  protectionists  in  the  interior  were  strongly  opposed 
to  the  liberal  system;  the  revolutionary  parties  began  to  agitate; 
the  impolitic  expedition  to  Mexico  ended  in  a  humiliating  dis- 
aster ;  the  war  in  Italy  awakened  the  ambition  of  Germany,  which 
crushed  Austria  a  few  years  later  at  Sadowa  and  revolutionized 
the  equilibrium  of  Europe  to  the  detriment  of  France.  There 
was  progress  in  foreign  trade  but  this  progress  was  somewhat 
slower  than  that  of  the  preceding  periods. ^^ 

2.     The  Social  Background. 

With  the  vast  economic  changes  that  took  place  in  France  be- 
tween 1789  and  1865,  it  is  only  natural  to  expect  that  similarly 

38  For  the  distinction  between  general  commerce  and  special  commerce, 
see  Annuaire  Statistique  de  la  France,  Annees  1914-1915  p.  78. 

39  Levasseur,  "Histoire  du  Commerce  de  la  France,"  II.  pp.  823-827. 


i8  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J,  Proudhon 

vast  social  changes  would  follow.  And  they  did.  The  basis  of 
society  being  generally  economic,  when  the  power  and  prestige 
of  money  increased,  the  power  and  prestige  of  mere  title  corre- 
spondingly fell. 

In  the  old  economic  order  there  had  existed  two  large  antag- 
onistic groups ;  the  so-called  "privileged  orders,"  consisting  of  the 
nobles  and  the  clergy,  pitted  against  the  less  fortunate,  so-called 
"third  estate,"  consisting  of  the  bourgeoisie,  the  proletariat,  the 
peasants  and  the  serfs.*" 

After  the  downfall  of  the  Bourbon  Monarchy  in  1830,  the 
power  of  the  old  privileged  orders  became  insignificant.  The 
bourgeoisie,  who  were  for  the  most  part  rich  merchants  and  bank- 
ers, fell  heir  to  both  the  social  and  political  power  and  prestige 
that  had  formerly  been  held  by  the  nobles  *^  and  the  clergy.'*^ 

But  the  proletariat,  who  constituted  the  vast  majority  of  the 
people,  benefitted  little  from  this  changed  situation.  All  they 
seemed  to  gain  was  a  swelling  of  their  ranks,  due  partly  to  the 
abolition  of  serfdom,*^  which  had  been  completed  in  1789,  but 
mainly  to  the  development  of  industry  and  the  increasing  use  of 
labor-saving  machinery.  Their  position,  if  anything,  became  even 
worse  than  under  the  old  regime.  And  though  the  old  class  dis- 
tinction had  virtually  disappeared,  a  new  class  distinction  was 
brought  into  existence.  This  new  economic  order  brought  about 
a  division  of  the  people  into  three  classes:  (1)  peasants,  a  small, 
yet  not  inconsiderable  group;  (2)  proletariat,  the  vast  majority; 
and  (3)  bourgeoisie,  a  very  limited  group,  who  took  the  place 
formerly  held  by  the  old  privileged  orders. 

*«  C.  D.  Hazen,  "Modern  Europe,"  New  York,  1917,  pp.  40-51. 

*^  According  to  Bouille,  there  were  80,000  noble  families  in  France 
before  1789.  Only  1,000  of  them  were  old  noble  families.  Of  these  only 
200  to  300  escaped  poverty  and  misfortune.  To  Sieyes  and  Lavoisier, 
there  were  only  25.000  noble  families  before  1789  instead  of  80,000. 
(Lavergne,  p.  449.    Sugenheim,  pp.  183-187.) 

*2  According  to  the  law  of  Nov.  2,  1789,  the:  property  of  the  church 
was  at  the  disposition  of  the  nation.  In  Feb.  13,  1790,  all  the  monastical 
orders  were  abolished.     (Lavergne,  p.  19.) 

**  Lavergne  p.  S.    Levasseur  "Histoire  ...  a  1870,"  I.  p.  10. 


The  Social  Background  19 

'  It  was  when  things  had  just  about  reached  this  state,  that 
Proudhon  first  commenced  to  enter  into  public  affairs.  He  felt 
that  the  situation  called  for  a  social  revolution.  He  determined 
to  bring  it  about — to  bring  about  a  revolution  wherein  all  class 
distinction  would  at  last  be  wiped  out  forever ;  ^*  a  revolution, 
after  which  all  would  be  equal  members  of  one  great  class.  There 
would  then  be  no  more  peasants,  and  bourgeoisie  and  proletariat. 
All  would  be  workingmen — producers.  There  would  then  be 
nothing  else  than  producers.**  And  agriculture  would  then  be 
recognized  'as  the  foremost  of  the  fine  arts.*^  j 

(a)  The  peasants. 

As  has  already  been  seen,  the  number  of  small  land-owners  was 
considerably  increased  between  1789  and  1860.*^  France,  there- 
fore, became  pre-eminently  a  land  of  petty,  but  prosperous, 
proprietors. 

The  significance  of  this  development  is  two-fold.  First,  as  a 
result  of  this  development,  there  was  created  in  France  a  distinct 
class — the  peasants,  those  who  gained  their  livelihood  from  the 
soil,  as  over  against  the  proletariat,  those  who  gained  their  live- 
lihood from  the  industries,  which  represents  the  interests  of  the 
industrial  classes.*^  Second,  this  new  agricultural  class  formed 
an  element  of  stability  in  French  politics  because  it  was  always 
conservative  and  anti-socialistic.*^ 

(b)  The  bourgeoisie. 

The  movement  for  the  emancipation  of  the  bourgeoisie  began 
at  the  end  of  the  eleventh  century  and  spread  into  the  twelfth  and 
thirteenth  centuries.  The  bourgeoisie  had  secured  concessions 
from  their  feudal  lords  or  from  their  kings,  both  by  outright 
purchase  and  by  revolt.  Aspiring  to  municipal  liberty,  they  cre- 
ated self-governing  communes,  and  therefore  were  no  longer  at 

**  For  detailed  discussion  of  the  proposed  social  revolution,  see  Chaps, 
VI,  and  VII,  below. 

*5  Proudhon,  "Justice,"  I.  515. 

^^  See  above,  pp.  10-11. 

47  Hayes,  II,  p.  93.    Sugenheim,  pp.  181-182. 

*8  Guerard,  p.  48. 


ao  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

the  mercy  of  the  feudal  lords.*®  By  their  number  and  their 
wealth,  the  bourgeoisie  who  had  in  the  thirteenth  century  barely 
held  a  place  in  society,  became  under  the  reign  of  Louis  XIV 
and  later  in  1789,  the  'most  important  of  the  three  orders  of  the 
state.  " 

But  during  the  revolution,  their  political  influence  was  still 
greater.  Not  only  the  Constituent  Assembly,  but  also  the  Con- 
vention, had  a  majority  of  bourgeoisie.^^  During  the  Restoration, 
the  nobility  and  clergy  seemed  to  have  regained  an  upper  hand 
over  them.  But  after  1830,  they  came  into  power  again.  The 
government  of  the  July  monarchy  was  a  government  of  the  bour- 
geoisie, by  the  bourgeoisie  and  for  the  bourgeoisie.  The  bourgeois 
spokesmen,  Laffitte,  in  1830  and  Casimir  Eerier  in  1831,  not  only 
were  influential  in  industry  and  commerce,  but  also  in  the  gov- 
ernment as  well.^^ 

In  1848,  there  were  124,000  entrepreneurs  who  belonged  to 
the  "haute"  and  the  "moyenne"  bourgeoisie.  Some  of  them  en- 
joyed great  fortunes;  others  were  deputies,  electors,  generals, 
municipal  magistrates,  or  officers  of  the  national  guard,  and 
formed  the  governing  class  of  the  state.  It  is  this  class  which 
Villeneuve-Bargemont  described  as  the  "new  feudality" — a  new 
feudality  much  more  despotic,  much  more  oppressive,  and  much 
more  influential  than  the  feudaUty  of  the  middle  age. 

Besides  this  class,  there  were  1,548,000  employers  and  skilled 
laborers  in  the  small  industries  who  belonged  to  the  group  of  the 
"moyenne"  and  the  "petite"  bourgeoisie.  This  group  consisted  of 
both  men  who  were  comparatively  well  off,  and  of  men  whose 
material  conditions  were  no  less  precarious  than  that  of  the 
workingmen.  They  participated  very  little  in  the  political  affairs 
of  the  state.^* 


*9  Levasseur  "Histoire  .  .  .  avant  1789"  p.  889. 

50  Ibid:  pp.  977,  978-999.  See  Hayes  II.  p.  471. 

"  Levasseur  "Histoire  ...  a  1870,  I.  pp.  78,  250.    II,  288-290. 

"/fcid;  I,  p.  5.  II,  p.  11. 

^^Ibid:    I,  p.  289. 


The  Social  Background  21 

(c)   The  proletariat.^^ 

Owing  to  the  development  of  industry,  there  grew  up  in 
France  a  new  social  class — the  proletariat.  The  increase  of  the 
number  of  workingmen  from  1789  to  1872  was  very  significant. 
In  the  department  of  Haut  Rhin,  for  instance,  there  were  44,000 
workingmen  in  1813;  44,800  in  1827  and  91,000  in  1834.^=  From 
1830  to  1866  the  number  of  workingmen  was  greatly  increased. 
According  to  the  census  of  1866,  there  were  10,959,091  persons 
who  depended  on  the  work  of  industry  for  their  living.  The  total 
population  of  France  in  1866  was  37,372,000.^'^  The  number  of 
workingmen  therefore  formed  28.8%  of  the  total  population.  In 
no  less  thas  seven  departments,  the  workingmen  exceeded  40%  of 
the  population;  Nord  52%,  Seine  50%,  Ardennes  47%,  Bas-Rhin 
44%,  Sommes  44%,  SeineTnferieure  42%  and  Aisne  41%." 

From  an  historical  point  of  view,  the  development  of  the 
workingmen's  class  in  France  may  be  divided  into  two  periods: 
(1)  the  period  of  discontent  and  disorder  (1789-1830),  and  (2) 
the  period  of  organized  strikes  and  insurrections  (1830-1865). 

During  the  great  revolution,  industry  languished;  workshops 
were  deserted;  and  most  of  the  workingmen  fell  into  the  state 
of  extreme  poverty,  or  even  mendicancy.  The  condition  of  the 
workingmen  was  particularly  deplorable  in  1792.  Misery  and 
poverty  reigned  in  Abbeville,  Amiens  and  still  worse,  in  Rouen. 
In  Lyons,  there  were  28,000  persons  who  lived  on  charity.^®  The 
condition  of  the  workingmen  was  no  better  under  the  First  Em- 
pire. In  1807,  21,950  out  of  66,850  workingmen  in  Paris  re- 
mained without  any  work.^*  On  April  4,  1813,  the  workingmen 
at  the  suburb  of  Saint-Antoine.  demanded  work  or  bread.    They 

5*  For  a  brief  view  of  the  condition  of  the  workingmen  before  1789, 
see  Levasseur  "Histoire  .  .  .  avant  1789"  pp.  881-882. 
55  Villerme,  I,  pp.   14-16. 
5«  Levasseur  "Histoire  ...  a  1870"  II,  p.  612. 

57  Ihid:  II,  p.  575. 

58  Levasseur  "Histoire  ...  a  1870."    I,  pp-  49-53,  58-62,  280-283. 
59/6irf:   I,  p.  506. 


22  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

even  posted  placards  on  the  wall  attacking  the  Emperor.  Nat- 
urally they  were  soon  suppressed  by  the  police.®"  During  the 
period  of  the  Restoration,  the  condition  of  the  workingmen  be- 
came still  worse. 

But  they  had  neither  the  knowledge  nor  the  organization  to 
bring  about  any  amelioration  of  their  economic  conditions.®^ 
Some  of  them  demanded  an  increase  of  wages ;  ®^  others  pro- 
tested against  the  introduction  of  machines  into  the  factory.®^ 
Quite  often  they  quarrelled  among  themselves,  which  brought  on 
intervention  by  the  government.®*  There  was  no  well-organized 
action  on  their  part  against  the  capitalists.  It  is  true  that,  now 
and  then,  they  attempted  to  form  unions  demanding  an  increase 
of  wages.  But  most  of  these  unions  were  suppressed  by  the 
government  ®^  because  legally  they  had  no  right  to  form  unions.®* 
In  the  revolution  of  July,  1830,  the  workingmen  took  a  very 
active  part  in  the  overthrow  of  the  Bourbon  monarchy.  There 
was  then  awakened  in  them  a  political  consciousness,  and  they 
realized  that  they  would  become  a  very  important  factor  in  the 
affairs  of  the  state.  The  insurrection  of  the  workers  of  Lyons 
in  1831,  1832  and  1834,"  the  strike  of  the  carpenters  of  Saint 
Saloi  in  1833,  and  that  of  the  miners  of  Saint  Etienne  in  1844,®^ 
marked  the  beginning  of  an  economic  struggle  between  the  labor- 
er/^,irf;,  p.  506. 

61  Ibid:  II,  p.  876. 

e2Bourgin,  pp.  67,  129-132,  141,  211-213,  233,  273-274,  309-310. 

«3Bourgin,  pp.  125-127,  171-185,  211-213,  255-256,  365-375,  377-379. 

o*Ibid:  pp.  253-254,  256,  273,  276,  281,  283-286,  291-297,  312-313,  316, 
323-324. 

65/6id:  pp.  245-253,  265-272,  310,  312,  315-316,  322-323,  376. 

«6The  law  of  July,  1791  and  of  Germinal  22  Year  XI,  the  decree  of 
the  year  XII,  the  penal  code  of  1810,  the  law  of  1834  and  of  1849,  all 
prohibited  the  formation  of  unions  by  the  workingmen  (Levasseur  "His- 
toire  ...  a  1870"  I,  pp.  379-381,  497-498.  II,  pp.  12,  435-436,  875,  879  and 
Bourgin,  pp.  113-114).  It  was  only  after  the  enactment  of  the  law  of  May 
25,  1864  that  the  right  of  union  was  not  prohibited  to  them. 

(Levasseur  Histoire  ...  a  1870"  II,  p.  513.) 

67  Levasseur,  "Histoire  .  .  .  1870,"  II,  pp.  6-16. 

«8/6Mi;  pp.  240-242,  247-249,  514-520. 


The  Social  Background  23 

ers  and  the  industrial  capitalists.  After  the  February  revolution 
of  1848,  the  burning  question  of  the  day  was  how  to  satisfy  the 
demand  of  the  workingmen.  In  fact,  it  was  through  the  pressure 
of  the  workingmen's  party  that  the  government  appointed  the  ill- 
fated  Luxemburg  commission.^^ 

After  the  failure  of  the  commission  and  the  suppression  of 
the  June  insurrection,  the  political  influence  of  the  workingmen 
as  a  class  seemed  to  disappear  altogether.  But  this  is  not  the 
whole  truth.  Napoleon  III,  posing  as  the  Emperor  of  the  work- 
ingmen had  to  court  their  favor  for  his  personal  advantage.''" 

There  is  still  another  side  of  the  picture.  From  1830  to  1840, 
the  material  condition  of  the  workingmen  was  rather  deplorable. 
"What  strikes  the  man  of  justice  and  of  humanity,  in  examining 
the  conditions  of  the  workingmen,"  said  Villeneuve-Bargemont, 
"is  the  condition  of  dependence  and  abandonment  which  the 
workingmen  of  the  factories  suffered  from  the  oppression  of  the 
employers."  ^^  The  physical  and  moral  conditions  of  the  work- 
ingmen in  1834  and  1835,  as  described  by  Mr.  Villerme,  demands 
our  deepest  sympathy.''^  Debauchery,  intoxication  and  libertinage 
on  one  hand,^^  and  excessive  labor  hours,'^*  heartless  exploitation 
of  children  of  tender  age,^^  and  immoral  and  unhealthy  sur- 
roundings ^^  on  the  other,  were  not  uncommon  abuses  of  the 
manufactures  he  visited.  Against  these  abuses,  certain  mild  be- 
ginnings of  social  legislation  were  found  in  the  'child  labor  law 
of  1841 ;  in  the  twelve  hour  law  of  1848 ;  '^^  in  the  permission  ex- 
tended to  laborers  to  form  cooperative  societies  for  collective 

69  Ibid:  II,  pp.  877-878. 

70  Hayes,  II,  pp.  158-159. 

71  Villerme,  II,  253. 

72  For  a  general  view  of  the  condition  of  the  workingmen  in  the  cotton, 
silk  and  woolen  industry,  see  Villerme,  I.  pp.  437-446. 

73  Levasseur  "Histoire  ...  a  1870."  II,  pp.  223-226.  Villerme  I,  pp. 
79-86,  105-107. 

74  Villerme,  I,  p.  22.    II,  pp.  83-85. 

75  Villerme,  II,  pp.  86-92,  110-125. 

76  Villerme,  II,  pp.  203-275. 

77  Ogg,  pp.  398-399,  400-401. 


24  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

buying  and  selling  (1863);  in  legislation  for  trade  unions,  and 
the  recognition  for  the  first  time  of  the  right  of  strikes  and  lock- 
outs (1864)  ;  and  in  the  extension  of  state  guarantees  to  work- 
ingmen's  voluntary  insurance  against  death  and  industrial  acci- 
dents (1868).^« 

Thus  we  see  in  France,  between  1830  and  1865,  three  distinct 
classes.  The  bourgeoisie,  the  ruling  class  of  the  day,  powerful 
in  the  government  and  dominating  industry  and  commerce.  The 
proletariat,  poor  but  restless,  antagonistic  to  the  capitahsts  and 
listening  eagerly  to  democratic  and  socialistic  agitators.  Between 
these  two  classes,  there  was  the  peasant  class  which,  forming  a 
not  inconsiderable,  though  small,  section  of  the  French  population, 
was  anti-socialistic  and  would  always  act  as  a  counter-balance  to 
the  radical  tendency  of  the  proletariat. 

3.     The  Political  Background. 

Needless  to  say,  the  economic  and  social  changes  found  their 
reflection  in  corresponding  changes  in  the  government.  At  first, 
monarchy  by  divine  right  is  seen  giving  place  to  the  republic  of 
the  bourgeoisie.  Then,  to  the  military  government  of  Napoleon. 
Then,  to  the  reactionary  Bourbon  monarchy.  Then,  to  the  bour- 
gois  monarchy  of  Louis  Philippe.  Then,  to  the  Second  Republic. 
Then,  to  the  plebiscitary  government  of  Louis  Napoleon. 

Proudhon  helped  in  the  overthrow  of  the  bourgeoisie  mon- 
archy of  Louis  Philippe  in  1848.  He  believed  that  thereby  he 
could  help  establish  a  true  republic.  But  the  republic  that  was 
established  was  not  the  one  he  had  had  in  mind.'^^  On  becoming 
a  member  of  the  Assembly,  in  1848,  he  took  occasion  to  let  the 
general  public  know  this,  by  giving  his  views  fiery  utterance  on 
the  Assembly  floor.  His  speeches  became  surcharged  with  abuse, 
which  he  hurled  indiscriminately,  not  taking  any  particular  pains 
to  avoid  Louis  Napoleon.  For  his  efforts,  Louis  Napoleon  had 
him  thrown  into  prison  in  1849,  where  he  remained  for  the  next 

78  Hayes,  II,  p.  159. 

78  Proudhon,  "Justice,"  II,  p.  132. 


The  Political  Background  25 

three  years.  When  he  came  out,  in  1852,  he  found  that  by  a 
coup  d'Etat  in  1851,  Louis  Napoleon  'had  adroitly  changed  the 
republic  into  an  empire.^" 

Proudhon  approved  of  Louis  Napoleon's  Empire  no  more 
than  he  had  approved  of  his  Republic.  Neither  monarchy,  be  its 
form  what  it  may,  nor  the  traditional  republic,  suited  Proudhon.®^ 
For  him,  at  first,  the  ideal  form  of  government  was  as  paradoxi- 
cally expressed  by  him  that  of  anarchy ;  which  view  gave  way  in 
the  last  years  of  his  life  to  a  belief  in  federalism.^^ 

As  has  already  been  seen,  the  history  of  France  between  1789 
and  1830  was  politically  a  history  of  struggle  between  the  bour- 
geoisie and  the  old  privileged  orders — the  nobility  and  the  clergy. 
From  1830  to  1872,  it  was  a  history  of  struggle  between  the 
bourgeoisie  and  the  proletariat. 

To  be  more  exact,  we  may  divide  the  history  of  France  into 
six  periods:  (1)  the  revolution  (1789-1799);  (2)  the  consulate 
and  the  first  empire  (1799-1815);  (3)  the  Restoration  (1815- 
1830)  ;  (4)  the  July  monarchy  (1830-1848)  ;  (5)  the  second  re- 
public (1848-1851)  ;  and  (6)  the  second  empire  (1852-1872). 

From  1789  to  1799,  the  bourgeoisie  seemed  to  be  triumphant 
over  the  old  privileged  orders — the  nobility  and  the  clergy.  They 
abolished  all  the  survivals  of  serfdom.  They  confiscated  the  great 
estates  of  the  nobility  and  the  clergy.  In  a  word,  they  overthrew 
the  old  regime  and  inaugurated  a  new  one — the  regime  of  the 
bourgeoisie.^^ 

After  the  coup  d'Etat  of  1799,  the  condition  was  quite  differ- 
ent. Napoleon,  acting  as  an  arbiter  between  conflicting  parties 
and  classes,  played  them  against  each  other,  with  admirable  skill. 
Leaning  sometimes  toward  the  people,  sometimes  toward  the 
conservative  elements,  always  towards  the  army,  he  suppressed 
every  opposition  and  every  remaining  check.^* 

80  See  Chapter  II. 

81  See  Chapter  V. 

82  See  Chapter  VI  and  VII. 

83  Guerard,  p.  51.    Levasseur  "Histoire  ...  a  1870,"  I,  pp.  78,  288-290, 
536-540. 

84  Guerard,  pp.  74-76. 


26  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

Then  came  the  Restoration.  The  royaUsts,  composed  of  the 
nobiUty  and  the  clergy,  obtained  control  of  the  government, 
and  many  reactionary  measures  were  adopted  by  them  against 
the  bourgeoisie.®^  The  position  of  the  Bourbon  monarchy  was 
gradually  weakened. 

Then  the  liberal  bourgeoisie  again  came  into  power  and  over- 
threw the  government  in  1830.®®  Perhaps  we  may  notice  in  pass- 
ing that  the  year  1830  is  very  significant,  politically,  in  the  his- 
tory of  France.  It  was  then  that  the  old  privileged  orders — the 
nobility  and  the  clergy — declined,  and  the  bourgeoisie  triumphed. 
It  was  then  that  the  new  class  struggle  between  the  bourgeoisie 
and  the  proletariat  just  began  to  develop. 

From  1830  to  1848,  France  was  a  middle-class  monarchy. 
What  reforms  were  made  during  this  period  were  essentially 
middle-class  reforms.  The  municipal  reforms  of  1831  and  the 
educational  reforms  of  1833,  were  the  best  examples.  For  a  time, 
the  government  was  popular  with  the  bourgeoisie,  and  held  its 
ground.  But  the  determined  resistance  of  the  king  to  the  grow- 
ing demand  for  electoral  reform  from  part  of  the  constitutional 
monarchists  and  the  dynastic  Left,  i.e.,  the  Liberal  and  the 
Royalist  middle  class,  led  at  last  to  open  insurrection  in  Paris. 
Thus,  through  the  comtined  effort  of  the  bourgeoisie  and  the 
workingmen,  the  compromise  government  of  Louis  Philippe  was 
overthrown  in  1848.®'' 

The  revolution  of  1848  presents  two  distinct  phases:  (1) 
from  February  to  April,  1848,  the  joint  government  of  the  work- 
ingmen and  the  bourgeoisie  and  (2)  after  April  23,  1848,  the 
suppression  of  the  workingmen's  insurrection,  known  as  the  "June 
days"  and  the  complete  triumph  of  the  bourgeoisie.®® 

In  December,  1848,  Louis  Napoleon  was  elected  as  the  presi- 
dent of  the  second  republic,  by  an  overwhelming  majority  of  the 
Assembly.    From  the  outset  of  his  administration,  he  deliberately 


85  Hayes,  II,  pp.   14-20,  93-94. 

86  Ibid:  p.  95.     Lcvasseur,  "Histoire  ...  a  1870,"  II,  pp.  3-4. 

87  Hayes,  II,  pp.  116-120. 
^^Ibid:  pp.   120-122. 


The  Political  Backgr«un»  27 

set  about  enlisting  the  support  of  all  political  and  social  groups 
in  the  state .  Having  found  his  position  well  established,  he  wil- 
fully brought  about  the  coup  d'Etat  of  1851. 

From  1851  to  1870,  the  government  of  Louis  Napoleon  tried 
to  win  the  favor  of  the  conservatives,  the  liberals,  the  working- 
men  and  the  capitalists  all  alike,  but  it  found  it  could  not  side 
whole-heartedly  with  any  of  them.*^ 

4.    The  Philosophical  Background 

The  economic,  social  and  political  changes  that  have  been 
noted  could  hardly  have  taken  place  without  being  somehow 
accounted  for  by  changes  in  French  thought.  There  was  ample 
change.  This  gave  rise  to  various  philosophical  schools.  In 
Proudhon's  time  French  thought  was  divided  into  three  such 
schools;  that  of  the  "democrates,"  which  had  been  influenced  in  a 
great  measure  by  the  ideas  of  Rousseau,  that  of  the  traditionalists, 
and  that  of  the  socialists,  with  none  of  which  Proudhon  agreed. 

Rousseau's  principles  embodied  the  revolutionary  spirit  of  the 
eighteenth  century.  He  was  democratic.  But  to  Proudhon,  who 
himself  had  ample  room  to  improve  his  acquaintance  with  eco- 
nomic principles,  Rousseau's  philosophy  was  not  trustworthy 
because  he  knew  nothing  about  economic  problems  of  the  state, 
or  at  least  made  no  endeavor  to  solve  them.^°  So,  away  with 
Rousseau  and  his  teachings. 

The  Traditionalists,  on  the  other  hand,  were  monarchical. 
This  was  reactionary.  Besides,  Proudhon  hated  monarchy  any- 
how.    So,  away  with  the  Traditionalists  and  their  teachings. 

As  for  the  Socialists,  they  aimed  at  ameliorating  the  social 
conditions  of  the  lower  classes.  But  to  Utopian  and  impractical 
Proudhon,  the'  Socialists  were  Utopian  and  impractical.  So, 
away  with  the  Socialists  and  their  teachings. 

^^Ibid:  pp.  155-159.  In  fact  it  was  Napoleon  III  who  dissolved  the 
middle  class  assembly,  proclaimed  the  establishment  of  the  universal  man- 
hood suffrage  in  favor  of  the  proletariat  and  brought  about  the  coup  d'Etat 
of  1851.    See  also  Levasseur  "Histoire  ...  a  1870."  II,  pp.  467-475. 

90  Proudhon,  Idee  Generale,  pp.  116-120. 


28  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

He  consigned  them  all  to  the  governmental  ash-pile.  The 
ideal  government,  he  insisted,  was  to  have  no  government,  which 
meant,  of  course,  anarchy.  But  finding  that'  since  people  are 
only  human  some  government  is  necessary,  he  insisted  that  in  that 
event,  it  should  be  as  little  government  as  possible;  which,  of 
course,  meant  federalism.^^ 

From  the  point  of  view  of  its  social  and  political  philosophy, 
the  history  of  France  may  be  divided  into  three  periods:  (1) 
1760-1800,  (2)  1802-1825  and  (3)  1825-1865.  The  first  is  a 
period  of  revolt  against  the  abuses  of  the  old  economic,  social 
and  political  order.  Rousseau  was  the  incarnation  of  this  revo- 
lutionary spirit.  The  second  is  a  period  of  reaction. 
Weary  of  rationalism  and  pseudo-classical  mythology,  it  sought 
to  return  to  Catholicism  and  feudal  monarchy.  The  masters  of 
this  period  are  Chateaubriand,  De  Maistre,  De  Bonald,  Lamen- 
nais.^^  The  third  period  is  one  of  social  unrest— a  period  wherein 
the  industrial  revolution  first  had  its  full  sway  in  France,  and 
wherein  the  poverty  and  the  misery  of  the  workingmen  began  to 
be  keenly  felt  by  the  public.  Failing  to  cope  with  this  new  situa- 
tion, the  CathoHc  reactionaries  fell  into  a  state  of  spiritual  an- 
archism, of  negation  and  despair  ;^2  whereas  the  individualistic 
liberals  fell  into  the  more  embarrassing  state  of  smug  optimism 
or  stony  fatalism.^*  In  consequence,  socialistic  ideas  were  eag- 
erly listened  to  by  the  proletariat. 

Thus  the  revolutionary  school,  the  traditional  school  and  the 
socialistic  school  formed  the  three  main  currents  of  thought  in 
France  etween  the  year  1760  and  1865. 
(a)   The  revolutionary  school. 

Voltaire,  Diderot  and  Rousseau  were  the  three  distinguished 
intellectual  leaders  of  the  French  revolutionary  school  in  the 
eighteenth  century.  But  Rousseau  was  the  most  directly  revo- 
lutionary of  them  all.     His  political  theory  in  general  and  his 

»i  See  Chapters  VI  and  VII,  below. 
92Guerard,  pp.  116-117. 
93 /bid;  p.  117. 
^*lhid:  p.  194. 


The  Philosophical  Background  29 

theory  of  sovereignty  and  of  the  social  contract  in  particular, 
are  so  generally  understood  that  it  will  be  unnecessary  for  us 
to  consider  them  here.''^ 

(b)   The  traditionalist  school. 

The  political  doctrine  of  the  traditionalist  school  is 'directly  op- 
posed to  that  of  the  revolutionary  school.  First,  it  attacks  the 
theory  of  the  social  contract.  "The  tower  of  Babel"  says  De 
Maistre,  "is  the  naive  image  of  a  mass  of  men  who  assemble  to 
create  a  constitution.^''  Not  only  does  the  power  to  create  not 
belong  to  men,  but  it  appears  that  our  power,  unassociated,  does 
not  extend  to  changing  for  the  better  established  institutions."  ®^ 
Bonald  repudiates  the  doctrine  of  the  social  contract  in  a  more 
vigorous  way.  Society,  according  to  him,  is  the  creation  of  God, 
instead  of  man.  Social  contract  involves  the  idea  of  equality 
between  contracting  parties.  How  can  man  be  subject  to  equals? 
Only  where  some  are  in  the  position  of  inferiors  is  there  willing- 
ness to  accept  so  hard  but  so  necessary  a  fact.  Besides,  social 
contract  again  implies  the  idea  of  organization;  and,  to  organi- 
zation, power  is  already  essential.  Once  power  is  present,  there 
is  no  longer  that  equality  of  status  which  puts  its  institution  on 
valid  grounds.^* 

Second,  the  traditionalist  school  attacks  the  theory  of  popular 
sovereignty.  DeBonald  identified  popular  sovereignty  with  athe- 
ism and  materiahsm.^^  "If  the  people  is,  as  declared,  legiti- 
mately sovereign,  then,"  said  he,  "all  laws  made  by  them  must 
be  just.  But  justice  rests  upon  a  broader  and  deeper  basis  than 
this."  ^^^     Lamennais  denounced  the  sovereignty  of  the  people 

^5  For  a  general  view  of  his  work  see  Dunning,  "Political  theories 
from  Rousseau  to  Spencer,"  New  York,  1920,  pp.  1-44.  Janet,  "Histoire  de 
la  science  politique  dans  ses  rapports  avec  la  morale,  second  edition,  Paris, 
1887,  Vol.  II,  pp.  415-477.  Lowell  "Rousseau  and  the  Sentimentalists," 
in  Among  my  Books  (1870),  Vol.  I. 

^6  fitude  sur  la  souverainete,  p.  238. 

^^  Essai  sur  la  principe  generateur  des  constitutions  politiques,  p.  53. 

98  Principe  Constitutif,  pp.  449-450. 

^9  Essai   Analytique,   p.   55. 

100  Legislation  primitive,   Oeuvres   III,   p.   21. 


30  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

even  more  bitterly.  The  sovereignty  of  the  people  tends  to  sub- 
vert social  order  and,  in  making  of  power  the  plaything  of  am- 
bitious pride,  renders  tolerance  impossible.^*'^ 

Thirdly,  the  traditionalist  school  attacks  the  theory  of  the  gen- 
eral will.  De  Maistre  said  rather  ingeniously,  "The  law  is  so  little 
the  will  of  all,  that  the  more  it  is  the  will  of  all  the  less  it  is 
law,  so  that  it  would  cease  to  be  law  if  it  were  v/ithout  exception 
the  work  of  all  who  owe  it  obedience."  ^°' 

So  much  for  the  negative  criticism  of  the  traditionalist  school. 
Positively  speaking,  the  basic  idea  of  the  traditionalists  is  three- 
fold. First,  it  is  religious.  "Government,"  says  De  Maistre,  "is 
really  a  religion ;  it  has  its  dogmas,  its  mysteries,  its  ministers."  ^"^ 
"Everything  shows  us  the  cradle  of  sovereignty  surrounded  by 
miracles,  and  the  divinity  intervening  in  the  foundation  of  em- 
pires." "*  To  De  Bonald,  God  is  essentially  the  directing  force 
of  the  world. "^  While  desiring  men's  happiness,  he  has  laid 
down  laws  for  them  with  that  end  in  view.^°®  Princes  are  the 
ministers  of  God  and  it  is  because  they  are  the  ministers  of  God 
that  their  interest  is  at  one  with  that  of  the  people.^°^  Second, 
it  is  monarchical.  Chateaubriand,  De  Maistre,^*"  Lamennais  ^"^ 
and  De  Bonald  are  all  advocates  of  absolute  monarchy.  De  Bon- 
ald's  argument  for  monarchy  is  especially  significant.  According 
to  him,  the  king  is  the  absolute  sovereign.     He  wills,  and  his 

i«i  Oeuvres  Completes  II,  pp.  188  and  193. 

io2£tude,  p.  247. 

103  Ibid:  p.  247. 

^o^Ibid:  p.  199. 

105  Laski's  "Authority  in  the  Modern  State,"  p.  132. 

^°^Ibid:  p.  134. 

107  Ibid:  p.  149. 

108  DeMaistre  advocates  absolute  monarchy  in  his  "Essai  sur  le 
principe  gencrateur  des  constitutions  politiqucs,"   (1810). 

100  Lamennais  defended  absolute  monarchy  in  the  Conscrvateur  of 
1818-20.  But  in  1834,  he  wrote  "Paroles  d'un  Croyant"  declaring  war 
agauist  monarchy  and  papacy,  preaching  revolution  as  a  sacred  duty  and 
looking  to  the  emergence  of  a  new  society  and  a  new  Christianity. 


The  Philosophical  Background  31 

absolute  command  is  binding  upon  every  element  in  the  body- 
politic,  and  exercised  for  the  benefit  of  the  people.^^** 

In  contrasting  the  idea  of  the  traditionalist  school  with  that 
of  Rousseau,  we  shall  not  fail  to  see  that  while  the  theory  of  the 
former  is  a  theory  of  tradition,  of  divine  right  and  of  faith,  the 
theory  of  the  latter  is  a  theory  of  reason  against  tradition,  of  man 
against  God,  and  of  democracy  against  monarchy. 

(c)    The  socialists. 

The  industrial  revolution  in  France  as  has  already  been  seen 
created  two  new  classes — the  bourgeoisie,  wealthy  and  prosper- 
ous, and  the  proletariat,  poor  and  oppressed.  In  coping  with  this 
new  situation,  the  socialists  devised  various  schemes,  some  prac- 
tical, others  illusive. 

One  of  the  earliest  leaders  in  the  socialistic  movement  is  Henri 
de  Saint-Simon.  Having  witnessed  the  confusion  and  horrors  of 
the  French  revolution,  St.  Simon  was  liberal,  but  not  democra- 
tic. He  attacked  the  theory  of  popular  sovereignty.  The  sov- 
ereignty of  the  people,  according  to  him,  is  simply  the  antithesis 
of  the  sovereignty  of  divine  right,  or  the  sovereignty  by  the 
grace  of  God.  It  is  the  metaphysic  of  the  legalists  against  that 
of  the  clergy.^^^  Again,  the  sovereignty  of  the  people  is  incom- 
petent. When  its  power  touches  the  domain  of  production  and 
exchange,  some  crisis  will  inevitably  foUow.^^^ 

While  denouncing  the  sovereignty  of  the  people,  St.  Simon 
considered  the  representative  monarchy  as  a  necessary  transitory 
regime,  between  an  arbitrary  regime  which  existed,  and  a  liberal 
one  which  would  come  into  being  later.^^^  He  even  went  so  far 
as  to  propose  an  alliance  between  the  Bourbon  and  the  industrial 
classes.  He  asked  the  king  to  declare  himself  the  industrial 
chief  of  the  kingdom  and  to  accomplish  the  revolution  by  royal 
ordinance.  ^^^ 

1"  Laski's  "Authority  in  the  Modern  State,"  p.  152. 

1"  E.  Fourniere,  p.  104.     St.  Simon's  Oeuvres,  Vol.  XVI,  p.  211. 

112  E.  Fourniere,  p.  114. 

^^^Ibid:  p.  112. 

"4  St.  Simon's  Oeuvres,  Vol.  XXII.  p.  254. 


32  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

So  much  for  the  destructive  criticism  of  St.  Simon.  What  he 
expected  to  reahze  in  a  more  constructive  way  in  the  future, 
was  the  substitution  of  the  industrial  regime  for  the  feudal  and 
military  regime.  In  the  industrial  regime  there  are  five  main 
characteristics  which  we  may  notice.  First,  in  this  new  regime, 
industry  is  naturally  dominant.  The  government  will  gradually 
become  the  tributary  of  industry.^^^  Second,  the  government  of 
things  will  be  substituted  for  the  government  of  man,  the 'admin- 
istrative system  for  the  political  system,  capacity  for  power.^^^ 
Thirdly,  the  sovereignty  of  the  social  body  will  be  substituted  for 
the  sovereignty  of  the  people.  St.  Simon  is  rather  against  the 
interpretation  of  the  dogma  of  popular  sovereignty  than 
against  the  dogma  itself.  Instead  of  entrusting  to  men  who  are 
invested  with  social  functions  (St.  Simon  means  here  the  public 
officers)  the  most  important  political  function  of  fixing  the  direc- 
tion according  to  which  the  society  ought  to  advance,  it  will  be 
necessary  for  us  to  entrust  this  function  to  the  social  body  {corps 
social.)  ^^"^  This  social  body  was  to  consist  only  of  the  industrial, 
the  socially  useful,  the  learned  and  the  artists.  All  others,  who 
are  considered  by  St.  Simon  as  parasites,  axe  excluded.  Taken 
collectively,  this  social  body  would  exercise  the  power  of  the 
sovereign  in  the  state.^^^  Sovereignty,  to  him,  consisted  not  of 
opinions  arbitrarily  enacted  into  law,  but  of  principles  derived 
from  the  nature  of  things,  the  necessity  and  justice  of  which  are 
recognized  by  the  people.^^^  Fourthly,  the  government  should 
be  directed  by  the  competent  men  of  science,  of  the  fine  arts 
and  of  trade.  There  should  be  no  place  for  arbitrariness.^^** 
But  most  noteworthy  of  all  is  the  fact  that  in  the  new  regime 
he  neither  encouraged  nor  suspected  the  antagonism  between  the 


"5  Oeuvres,  Vol.  XIX.  pp.  148-149. 
118  E.  Fourniere,  p.  113. 

11'  "L'organizateur  Onzieme  lettre,  etc."     Oeuvres,  Vol.  XX,  pp.  197- 
198. 

118  E.  Fourniere,  p.  114. 

118  "L'Organizateur  Onzieme  lettre,  etc."    Oeuvres,  Vol.  XX,  p.  115. 

120  Paul  Janet,  "Saint  Simon  et  la  Saint  Simonisme,"  pp.  54-55. 


The  Philosophical  Background  33 

moneyed  class  and  the  workingmen.^^^  On  the  contrary,  it  is 
Lafitte  and  Perier,  the  well-known  industrial  capitalists,  he  has 
in  view  as  future  leaders  of  his  reform  enterprise.^^^  To  St. 
Simon,  the  property  owners,  however  inferior  in  number,  pos- 
sess more  knowledge  than  the  lower  classes.^^^ 

Frangois  Charles  Marie  Fourier  was  neither  a  partisan  of  ab- 
solutism, nor  of  representative  government.  Representative  gov- 
ernment, according  to  him,  while  subordinating  the  laboring  class 
to  the  possessing  class,  expresses  only  the  interests  of  the  latter.^^* 
More  emphatically,  he  repudiated  the  theory  of  popular  sover- 
eignty. The  person  whom  we  clothe  with  the  title  of  sovereignty, 
has  neither  work  nor  bread.  He  sells  his  life  at  five  sous  per 
day.  It  is  simply  absurd  to  speak  of  political  transformation 
without  corresponding  changes  in  the  organization  of  economic 
institutions. ^^^ 

In  the  place  not  only  of  absolutism  but  also  of  representative 
government  he  expected  to  establish,  in  the  future,  the  regime 
of  socialism,  or  mutual  guarantees,  in  which  complete  harmony 
would  prevail.  The  main  characteristics  of  the  regime  of  mutual 
guarantees  are  fourfold.  'First,  industry,  organized  on  the  basis 
of  a  comprehensive  study  of  human  nature,  would  be  more  at- 
tractive. The  chief  task  of  the  reformer  is,  therefore,  to  analyze 
human  passions,  and  to  study  their  combinations.  Fourier  dis- 
covers twelve  major  passions  which  can  be  combined  into  eight 
hundred  and  ten  characteristic  types.  His  psychology  is  to  a 
degree  fanciful. ^^^  Second,  all  the  members  will  be,  at  once,  pro- 
ducers and  consumers,  fairly  remunerated  in  proportion  to  their 
contribution  of  capital,  labor  and  talent.  In  other  words,  all  of 
them  must  be  productive  laborers.^^^  Thirdly,  the  regime  of 
mutual  guarantees  is  industrial.    To  Fourier,  the  individual  may 

i2i/&icf:  p.  98. 
122 /^i J;  pp.  36,  46. 

123  E.  Fourniere,  pp.   110-111. 

124  Ibid:  p.  186. 
125/fctW;  p.  104. 

126  Guerard,  p.  196. 

127  Sargent,  p.   145. 


34  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

develop  his  personality  without  any  restraints  except  the  law  of 
his  own  nature.  At  the  same  time,  he  should  not  impede  or  re- 
strain the  development  of  any  other  individual's  personality. 
So  with  Fourier,  the  individual  is  everything;  the  state  is  noth- 
ing.^-^  Fourthly,  local  autonomy,  or  decentralization,  is  also  one 
of  the  distinct  features  in  the  regime  of  mutual  guarantees. 
Every  commune,  managing  its  own  affairs,  would  have  no  rela- 
tion with  the  general  administration  either  of  the  kingdom  or  of 
the  globe,  except  to  pay  its  taxes  or  shares  of  the  public  expenses 
with  regularity  and  in  gross ;  and  to  send  delegates  to  the  assem- 
blies of  the  provinces,  of  the  kingdoms  and  of  the  earth's  capital, 
which  should  be  in  Constantinople.  So  in  this  new  social  organi- 
zation it  is  not  the  commune  which  is  a  fiction,  it  is  the  provinces, 
kingdoms,  states  which  are  fictitious,  since  they  represent  a  cer- 
tain number  of  communes,  without  any  power  over  them  or  in 
respect  of  them ;  tlie  communes,  or  phalansteres,  having  the  sole 
power  over  their  respective  local  governments. -^^^ 

Both  St.  Simon  and  Fourier,  we  may  notice  in  passing,  are 
indifferent  to  the  idea  of  class  struggle.  St.  Simon  urges  the  co- 
operation of  the  employer  and  the  employee;  Fourier,  that  of 
capital,  talent  and  work.^^^  They  do  not  represent  the  interests 
of  the  proletariat.  What  they  propose  to  emancipate  is  humanity 
at  large.^^^ 

Etienne  Cabet's  political  idea  was  essentially  influenced  by 
Rousseau.  This  may  be  shown  in  the  theory  of  equality.  Na- 
ture, according  to  him,  has  made  men  equal  not  only  in  force,  but 
also  in  intelligence.  For  him,  as  for  Rousseau,  inequality  origi- 
nates in  societ)^  Reason  is  a  secondary  providence  which  can 
create  equality.  Thus  he  entrusts  to  the  popular  sovereignty  the 
duty  of  creating  social  and  political  equality.^^^  His  theory  of 
sovereignty    is    similar    to    that    of    Rousseau.      In    subjecting 


128  E.  Fourniere,  p.  183. 

129  Sargent,  p.  154. 

130  Bcbel,  p.  39.    E.  Fourniere,  p.  400. 

131  E.  Fourniere,  Preface,  pp.  ii-iii. 
^^2  Ibid:   p.   10. 


The  Philosophical  Background  35 

the  people  to  the  sovereignty  of  the  people,  he  gives  to 
the  sovereign  an  unlimited  power.^^^  Society  should  concentrate, 
dispose  of  and  direct  all.  It  should  submit  all  the  wishes  and  the 
actions  of  the  people  to  its  regulations,  to  its  order  and  to  its 
discipline.^^^ 

Louis  Blanc's  idea  is  more  practical.  While  rather  tren- 
chantly criticising  the  prevailing  bourgeoisie  government  as  being 
a  government  by  a  class  and  for  a  class,  he  urged  the  establish- 
ment of  a  democratic  state,  which  should  direct  its  energies  to 
the  emancipation  of  the  proletariat  by  setting  up  national  work- 
shops for  the  workingmen.  He  believed  that  gradually  these 
national  workshops  would  displace  privately  owned  industrial 
establishments,  and  private  competition  would  be  made  to  give 
way  to  co-operative  production.^^^  Some  time,  when,  through 
the  complete  emancipation  of  the  workmen,  the  distinction  be- 
tween inferior  and  superior  classes  would  disappear,  there  would 
be  no  longer  need  of  a  strong  and  active  government.  But  as 
long  as  this  state  of  inferiority  lasts  for  the  workingmen,  the 
establishment  of  an  authority  is  indispensable.^^® 

And  now,  having  briefly  described  the  three  main  currents  of 
thought  in  France  in  the  nineteenth  century,  it  is  very  desirable 
for  us  to  find  out  Proudhon's  precise  attitude  toward  them. 

Proudhon's  criticism  of  Rousseau's  theory  of  social  contract, 
of  law  and  of  popular  sovereignty,  is  very  ingenious.  We  shall 
explain  the  details  of  it  later.  With  regard  to  the  traditionalists, 
he  speaks  of  them  with  a  mixed  feeling  of  admiration  and  con- 
tempt— admiration  for  their  genius  and  contempt  for  their  abso- 
lute doctrine.^^'^  But  most  significant  of  all,  is  his  criticism  of 
the  socialists. 

Speaking  generally  of  socialism  or  communism,  Proudhon 
did  not  seem  to  have  any  favorable  opinion  of  it.     Communism, 


^^3  Ibid:  p.  614. 

134  Voyage  en  Icarie,  p.  403. 

135  Ogg.,  pp.  495-496. 

136  Organization  du  Travail,   pp.   xxv. 

137  Melange,  III,  p.  42. 


36  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

according  to  him,  is  Utopian  and  impractical^^^  It  denies  expe- 
rience/^'^ annihilates  the  individual,  and  compels  him  to  sur- 
render his  personality  in  the  name  of  society.""  It  is  the  last 
heritage  of  religious  illusion,  and  the  mother  of  the  authorita- 
tive spirit/'*^  It  means,  further,  the  exploitation  of  the  strong 
by  the  weak."^  It  violates  the  sovereignty  of  conscience  and 
equality;  the  first  by  restraining  spontaneity  of  mind  and  heart, 
and  freedom  of  thought  and  action ;  the  second,  by  placing  labor 
and  laziness,  skill  and  stupidity,  and  even  vice  and  virtue  on  an 
equality  in  point  of  comfort.^*^ 

While  recognizing  the  merits  of  the  various  socialistic  pro- 
grammes respectively,"*  Proudhon  criticized  them  still  more  tren- 
chantly. The  idea  of  St.  Simon  is  not  scientific.  It  is  retrogres- 
sive. By  its  religious  inclination,  it  even  hampers  the  develop- 
ment of  economic  institutions,  and  the  spirit  of  liberalism  in 
society."^  In  the  establishment  of  industrial  feudality,  it  is  anti- 
democratic and  anti-liberal."^  His  criticism  of  Fourier  is  even 
more  violent  and  sarcastic.  Fourier  is  simply  a  whimsical 
writer."^  He  admits  equality,  the  idea  of  monarchical  govern- 
ment, and  democratic  government,  the  representative  system,  and 
the  dictatorial  system  of  labor  and  capital,  equality  and  inequality, 

138  ii>id:  p.  177.    Socialism  and  communism  identical,  Melange  II,  p.  132. 

139  Corresp.,  II,  p.  226. 
1*0  Justice,   I,   pp.    126-127. 
141  Bougie,  pp.  220-221. 

1*2  What  is  Property,  p.  250. 

1*3  Ibid:  p.  251. 

1**  "L'ecole  de  Saint-Simon,  en  protestant  la  premiere  au  nom  du  pro- 
letariat, a  done  pose  la  necessite  d'une  nouvcUe  revolution. 

L'ecole  de  Fourier,  en  faisant  appcl  a  la  science,  a  determine  par  la 
mcme  la  caractere  objectif  de  cette  revolution. 

Louis  Blanc,  en  proposant  d'organiser  le  travail,  a  determine  son 
caractere  cconomique."     Melange,  II,  p.  36. 

(See  also  Idee  Gencrale,  pp.  126,  136.) 

i«  Melange,  II,  pp.  32-33. 

1*8  Letter  to  Prince  Napoleon,  Sept.  7,  1853.  (See  Saint-Beuve 
"Proudhon"  appendice,  p.   322.) 

14T  Demonstration  du  socialismc   (O.  C.  XVIII,  p.  33). 


The  Philosophical  Background  37 

faith  and  reason.^*^  In  spite  of  the  enormous  rubbish  of  his 
hallucinations  still  remaining  to  us,  there  is  no  science,  no  theory, 
no  system  in  his  work.^*^  No  less  bitter  is  Proudhon's  criticism 
of  Louis  Blanc,  whose  idea  to  Proudhon  is  reactionary  and  doc- 
trinaire.^^" It  consists  in  replacing  free  action  by  the  initiative 
force  of  power,  the  real  being  by  a  being  of  reason,  life  and 
liberty  by  a  chimera.^^^ 


"8  Melange,  II,  p.  34. 

"9  Oeuvres,  Vol.  XVII,  p.  273. 

150  Melange,  II.  pp.  25,  35. 

151  Contradictions  Economiques,  II,  p.  261. 


CHAPTER  II 
Proudhon's  Life.^ 

In  the  evolution  of  abstract  doctrines,  the  immediate  environ- 
ment, be  it  political,  social  or  economic,  w^ill  necessarily  leave  its 
intellectual  impression.  So  w^ill  circumstances — the  circum- 
stances of  the  particular  age — circumstances  that  later  generations 
can  analyse  and  explain.  And  as  if  acting  in  opposition  to  these 
two  big  forces,  apparently  resisting  them  and  yet  being  moulded 
by  them,  there  vi^ill  always  be  found  that  comparatively  inexpli- 
cable force  of  a  powerful  personality.  If  in  reading  Proudhon, 
for  instance,  the  philosophical  student  attempts  to  reconstruct  the 
general  characteristics  of  the  age  in  which  he  lived,  the  student 
finds  he  must  at  the  same  time  reproduce  the  portrait  of  the 
person  with  whose  life  that  age  was  Hnked.  True,  the  student 
must  give  his  attention  to  the  Republicans,  the  Traditionalists, 
the  Socialists,  he  must  analyse  the  agricultural,  industrial  and 
commercial  revolutions,  he  must  familiarize  himself  with  the  me- 
chanical influence  exercised  on  the  age  by  its  contemporary  events 
and  by  the  events  of  its  historical  past ;  but  also,  and  as  a  key  to 
the  whole,  one  must  come  face  to  face  with  Proudhon,  the  man 
himself. 

Proudhon's  life  may  be  divided  into  two  periods :  ( 1 )  the 
period  of  boyhood  and  youth,  and  (2)  the  period  of  mature  intel- 
lectual  activity. 

(1)  The  period  of  boyhood  and  youth  (1809-1836). 

Proudhon  was  born  at  Besangon  in  January  1809.  His  par- 
entage was  proletarian ;  his  father  was  a  cooper,  enterprising  and 
sarcastic;  his  mother  a  cook,  a  superior  woman  with  a  heroic 

^  For  a  chronological  resume  of  Proudhon's  life,  see  appendix  1. 


Boyhood  and  Youth  39 

character.^  From  the  age  of  eight  to  twelve,  he  passed  his  time  in 
the  field,  occupying  himself  with  little  rustic  duties  and  taking 
care  of  the  cows.^  In  1820,  when  he  was  twelve  years  of  age,  he 
became  a  cellar  boy  in  an  inn.*  Later  in  the  same  year  he  was 
sent  to  the  college  of  Besangon,  where  |he  proved  himself  an  able 
student.^  But  on  account  of  the  poverty  of  his  parents,  he  was 
compelled  to  leave  school  before  receiving  a  degree.*^ 

In  1827,  when  he  was  nineteen  years  old,  he  entered  into  the 
service  of  Gauthier,  who  had  a  printing  house  in  Besangon.  At 
first  he  was  a  proof  reader,  later  he  became  a  compositor.'^  After 
the  revolution  of  July  1830,  the  business  of  the  company  greatly 
declined  and  he  had  to  leave.  Then  he  went  to  Paris  in  search 
of  work.  Finding  none  there  he  travelled  to  other  cities,  doing 
all  of  his  travelling  on  foot  because  he  lacked  the  means  for 
travelling  otherwise.  In  this  manner  he  journeyed  from  Paris 
to  Lyon  and  from  Lyon  to  Marseille.^  He  obtained  employment 
in  Neufchatel,  Lyon,  Marseille  and  Draguignan.^  None  of  the 
work,  however,  w^as  permanent  or  remunerative.  At  length  in 
1831,  he  found  himself  in  Toulon  without  work,  with  only  thirty 
francs  and  fifty  sous  in  his  pocket.^"  So  in  1832  he  returned  to 
Besangon  and  entered  the  company  of  Gauthier  as  an  overseer 
of  printing  {prote)}^  Toward  1836,  he  established  a  small  print- 
ing house  with  one  of  his  friends  in  Besangon,^-  which  business 
he  sold  in  1843  because  in  some  manner  it  became  "ruined."  ^' 

2  Desjardin  I.  pp.  3-4,  Miilberger  "P.  J.  Proudhon,"  pp.  3-4. 

3  F.  Miickle  II,  pp.  1-2.    Desjardin  I,  p.  6.    Lagarde,  p.  8. 

*  What  is  Property,  pp.  4-5. 
^  Desjardin  I,  .  9. 

^  What  is  Property,  pp.  4-5. 

''  Justice  I,  p.  241.  Lagarde,  p.  10.     Desjardin  I,  p.  12. 

*  Lagarde,  p.   11. 

9  Desjardin  I,  p.   14.     Mulberger  "P.  J.  Proudhon,"  pp.  7-8. 
^°  Lagarde,  p.  11. 

11  Desjardin  I,  p.  16.     Putlitz,  p.  82. 

12  Lagarde,  p.  11.     Desjardin  I,  p.  16.     What  is  Property,  p.  9.     Miil- 
berger "P.  J.  Proudhon,"  p.   10. 

13  What  is  Property,  p.  13.    Putlitz,  p.  80. 


40  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

Proudhon's  life  during  his  boyhood  and  youth  thus  becomes 
especially  significant  in  two  respects.  First,  he  was  a  man  of  the 
people.     Second,  he  was  a  self-taught  man. 

(2)  The  period  of  mature  intellectual  activity  (1837-1865). 

Proudhon  was,  essentially,  a  man  of  ideas  rather  than  a  man 
of  action.  His  intellectual  life  began  with  the  year  1837.  While 
working  in  the  printing  company  of  Gauthier  Bros,  during  the 
years  1827  and  1830  as  proof-reader  and  compositor,  amidst  the 
arduous  tedium  of  reading  and  composing  he  did  not  fail  to 
grasp  the  opportunity  of  learning  Greek,  Latin  and  even  He- 
brew. His  first  book  "Essai  de  grammaire  generate,"  which  he 
published  in  1837,  was  a  result  of  this  study.  Fortunately  for 
him,  about  this  time  he  somehow  succeeded  in  securing  a  trien- 
nial pension  of  1,500  francs  from  the  academy  of  Besangon 
known  as  the  Suard  Pension,^*  thus  giving  him  the  means  of 
studying  unharassed  by  financial  worries.  About  the  end  of 
1838,  he  went  to  Paris  for  the  purpose  of  pursuing  his  studies 
in  political  economy.^^ 

The  intellectual  life  of  Proudhon  from  1840  to  1865  may  be 
sub-divided  into  two  periods:  (a)  Proudhon  as  an  anarchist 
(1840-1861),  and  (b)  Proudhon  as  a  federalist  (1862-1865).  In 
1840,  he  declared  himself  an  anarchist.^**  From  this  time  on, 
until  the  year  1862,  he  fought  passionately  for  liberty  and  justice 
and  against  what  he  then  considered  was  the  tyranny  and  in- 
justice of  authority.  After  1862,  his  ideas  underwent  a  complete 
change.  Instead  of  anarchism  he  preached  the  doctrine  of 
federalism  in  politics  and  mutualism  in  economics.^^  Instead  of 
fighting  against  authority,  he  now  tried  to  balance  liberty  and 
authority  in  the  federal  regime. 

(a)  Proudhon  as  an  anarchist  (1840-1861). 

1*  What  is  Property,  pp.  9-10.    Desjardin  I,  pp.  25-27. 
Injustice,  I,  p.  292. 

18  "Although  a  firm  friend  of  order,  I  am  (in  the  full  sense  of  the 
term)   an  anarchist."     What  is  Property,  p.  260. 


The  Period  of  Anarchism  41 

We  may  first  consider  his  career  as  an  anarchist.  Proudhon's 
life  as  an  anarchist  passed  through  three  stages  of  change:  (x) 
The  period  of  demolition  (1840-1845),  (y)  the  period  of  tran- 
sition from  the  spirit  of  demolition  to  the  spirit  of  construction 
(1846-1852),  and  (z)  the  period  of  construction  or  of  maturity 
and  clearness  ( 1852-1861  ).i« 

(x)   The  period  of  demolition  (1840-1845). 

In  June,  1840,  Proudhon  published  "Qu'est-ce  que  la  pro- 
prietef"  (What  is  Property?)  and  dedicated  it  to  the  Academy 
of  Besangon.  This  work  is  full  of  destructive  criticism  against 
property.  Consequently  a  member  of  the  Academy  in  August 
of  the  same  year  called  the  Academy's  attention  to  Proudhon's 
work  and  demanded,  first  that  the  Academy  should  disavow  and 
condemn  the  production  with  all  formality  possible  as  having 
been  published  without  its  consent,  and  as  attributing  to  the 
Academy  opinions  directly  opposite  to  those  entertained  by  every 
one  of  its  members;  second,  that  Proudhon  should  be  directed, 
in  case  of  a  second  edition,  to  cancel  the  dedication ;  and  thirdly, 
that  the  resolutions  of  the  Academy  should  be  included  in  its 
printed  reports.  These  propositions,  having  been  put  to  the  vote, 
were  carried.  Proudhon  made  himself  merry  with  these  pro- 
ceedings. "After  this  burlesque  decree,  which  its  authors 
thought  to  render  vigorous  by  the  contradictions  it  contained," 
said  he,  "I  have  only  to  beg  my  readers  to  abstain  from  measuring 
the  intelligence  of  my  compatriots  by  that  of  our  Academy."^'' 

^'  ".  .  .  si,  en  1840,  j'ai  debute  par  I'anarchie  conclusion  de  ma  critique 
de  I'idee  gouvernementale,  c'est  que  je  devois  finir  par  la  federation,  base 
necessaire  du  droit  des  gens  Europeen  et,  plus  tard,  de  I'organisation  de 
tous  les  £tats."     Letter  to  his  friend,  Nov.  2,  1862. 

18  Diehl's  classification  is  somewhat  different  from  mine.  He  divides 
Proudhon's  life  from  1825-1865  into  the  three  following  periods:  (a) 
Die  vorbereitende  Periode  (1825-1848)  ;  (b)  Die  Periode  der  praktischen 
Vorschlage  und  Versuche  (Von  der  Februar  Revolution  bis  zur  Verurtei- 
lung  Proudhons  zu  3  Jahriger  Gefangnisstrafe  Marz  1849)  ;  (c)  Die 
Periode  nach  dem  scheitern  der  praktischen  Versuche  bis  zum  Tode 
Proudhons  (1849-1865),  Diehl,  p.  3. 

19  Sargant,  pp.  314-315.     Miilberger  "P.  J.  Proudhon,"  p.  25. 


42  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

But  this  is  not  the  end  of  the  whole  story.  In  1841,  the 
Academy  asked  him  to  appear  before  the  learned  society  {la  docte 
compagnie)  to  answer  questions  which  might  be  asked  about  his 
book,  or,  if  he  could  not  appear  in  person,  to  soon  make  known 
his  means  of  defense.  He  sent  them  a  written  reply.  While 
admitting  some  exaggerations  of  language  in  his  work,  he  in- 
sisted that  the  book  contained  nothing  which  should  alter  the 
bond  of  veneration  and  love  which  had  attached  him  to  the 
Academy,  and  especially  to  the  Franche-Comte.  The  Academy 
then  asked  him  to  publish  no  books  henceforth,  except  with  its 
consent.^" 

Not  only  the  Academy,  but  also  the  government  was  hostile 
towards  him.  Mr.  Vivien,  the  minister  of  justice,  had  thought 
of  prosecuting  him  for  his  work  inasmuch  as  the  book  not  only 
attacked  the  authority  which  adhered  to  property,  but  also  that 
which  was  inherent  in  government  itself.  The  minister,  however, 
saw  fit  to  consult  Mr.  Blanqui  on  the  subject.  Because  of  the 
latter's  advice,  the  notion  of  a  legal  proceeding  was  abandoned.^^ 

In  January,  1841,  Proudhon  became  a  collaborator  of  M. 
Turbot  in  writing  a  work  upon  the  problem  of  reformatories. 
He  called  them  "preventive  prisons."  M.  Turbot  was  a  judge  at 
the  tribunal  of  the  Seine.  He  was  a  man  of  action,  but  not  a 
man  of  ideas.  Proudhon  tried  to  infuse  his  anti-property  idea  j 
into  the  work  that  he  and  M.  Turbot  were  doing.  Their  relation- 
ship was  soon  severed.^^ 

In  answering  the  attacks  of  Fourier's  disciples  on  his  theory 
of  property,  Proudhon  published  in  1842  his  "Lettre  a  M.  Victor 
Considerant."^^  On  January  18,  1842,  his  work  was  seized  by 
the  government.  He  himself  was  accused  of  attacking  property 
and  stirring  up  hatred  against  the  government  and  against  certain 


20  Dcsjardin  I,  p.  48.     Miilberger  "P.  J.  Proudhon,"  pp.  25-31. 

21  Sargant  p.  315.  Blanqui  was  then  professor  of  political  economy  and 
member  of  the  institute  of  Paris  (See  also  Miilberger,  "P.  J.  Proudhon," 
pp.  31-32). 

22  Dcsjardin  I,  pp.  64-65.    Miilberger  "P.  J.  Proudhon,"  pp.  34-35. 

23  Lagarde,  p.  15. 


The  Period  of  Anarchism  43 

classes  of  the  people,  and  was  summoned  to  appear  before  the 
court  of  assizes  of  Doubs  on  the  3rd  of  February.  He  contended 
that  the  ideas  he  expressed  were  those  held  by  everyone,  and 
instead  of  being  hostile  to  the  government  he  was  favorable  to  it. 
He  was  acquitted.^* 

Between  1840  and  1844,  Proudhon  was  in  a  state  of  financial 
depression.  He  was  constantly  visited  by  poverty.^^  His  pension 
withdrawn  from  him  by  the  Academy  of  Besangon  in  1841,^^ 
and  his  printing  house  completely  ruined  in  1843,  he  was  com- 
pelled to  join  the  company  of  Gauthier  Bros.,  which  had  estab- 
lished a  steamboat  service  for  the  transport  of  coal  through  the 
canal  between  the  Rhone  and  the  Rhine.  He  then  became  their 
transportation  agent  at  Lyons,^^  where  he  worked  for  the  com- 
pany from  1843  to  1847.28 

During  these  years  Proudhon's  education  progressed  apace, 
and  particularly  his  studies  in  philosophy  as  well  as  in  national 
economy.  After  Blanqui  and  Joseph  Gamier  had  welcomed  him, 
he  was  introduced  to  the  members  of  "La  societe  d'economie 
politique,"  and  to  its  editor,  Guillaumin.  Being  a  devourer 
of  books,  he  quickly  made  himself  acquainted  with  the  economic 
doctrine  of  the  society.^^  In  consequence,  we  see  in  his  work 
after  1845,  not  only  the  element  of  destructive,  but  also  that  of 
constructive  thinking. 

\ 

(y)   The  period  of  transition  from  the  spirit  of  demolition 

to  the  spirit  of  construction  (1846-1852). 

In  1846,  he  published  his  "Systeme  des  Contradictions  Econo- 
miques."  Viewing  this  work  as  a  whole,  we  may  notice  that  it 
signifies  progress  in  the  intellectual  development  of  Proudhon, 

2*Desjardin  I,  p.  57.     Miilberger  "P.  J.  Proudhon,"  pp.  41-42. 
^^Ibid:  pp.  63-64. 

26  What  is  Property?  p.  13. 

27  Bougie,  p.  116.     Desjardin  I,  67.     Muckle  I,  pp.  4-5.    Lagarde  p.  21. 
Miilberger  "P.  J.  Proudhon,"  pp.  51-52. 

28  St.  Beuve,  p.  294.    Lagarde,  p.  21. 

29  Bougie,  p.  115.    Diehl,  p.  5. 


44  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

The  theory  of  mutualism^"  especially  marks  the  beginning  of  a 
positive  and  creative  spirit  in  his  work. 

As  has  already  been  mentioned,  Proudhon  worked  for  the 
company  of  Gauthier  from  1843-1847.  At  the  close  of  the  year 
1847  he  left  this  company  either  on  account  of  dislike  for  com- 
mercial practices,^^  or  on  account  of  some  misunderstanding 
with  his  patron,  and  immediately  repaired  to  Paris. ^^  Here 
he  assumed  a  very  active  life.  Politically  he  first  took  some 
part  in  the  revolution  of  1848;^^  then  in  the  same  year  he  was 
elected,  by  a  vote  of  77,900,  to  the  Chamber  of  Deputies.^*  In 
that  body  he  had  comparatively  little  influence.  He  attached 
himself  to  no  political  party,  but  attacked  the  radical  left  and 
the  reactionary  right  with  equal  bitterness.  Consequently,  both 
of  them  united  against  him.  In  July,  1848,  he  presented  a  plan 
of  income-tax.    It  was  voted  down.^* 

His  fierce  attacks  won  him  little  friendship  from  anybody, 
for  no  one  escaped,  not  even  Louis  Napoleon.  Proudhon's 
criticism  of  him  was  extremely  violent.  In  1848,  he  denounced 
him  as  the  enemy  of  democracy  and  socialism,^^  and  again  in 
Januarys  1849,  as  the  personification  of  reaction.^^  On  February 
14,  1849,  the  National  Assembly  authorized  Proudhon's  prose- 
cution. There  were  only  forty  members  dissenting.  He  was 
summoned  to  the  court  of  assizes  of  the  Seine.  He  was  accused 
of  exciting  hatred  and  contempt  in  the  citizens  against  the  gov- 
ernment and  against  each  other,  of  attacking  the  constitution, 
and  the  right  and  authority  of  the  president.  He  was  found 
guilty  and  sentenced  to  three  years'  imprisonment,  and  fined 
3,000  francs.    He  fled  to  Belgium.    !ln  June  following,  however, 

30  Cont.  Eco.  ch.  VII. 

31  Miickle  II,  pp.  4-5. 

32Lagardc,  p.  21.     Miilberger  "P.  J.  Proudhon,"  pp.  68-69. 

3^  He  volunteered  to  set  up  the  proclamations  of  the  insurgents,  and 
aided  in  building  barricades.     Melange,  II.  p.  8.     Desjardin,  I.  104-8. 

3*Lagarde,  pp.  54-55.  Ivor  his  activities  in  the  chamber  see  Putlitz, 
pp.  93-94. 

35  Melange  I,  p.  247. 

36  Melange  I,  p.  235. 


The  Period  of  Anarchism  45 

he  returned  to  Paris,  in  order  to  settle  some  of  his  personal 
affairs.    He  was  promptly  rearrested  and  put  into  prison.^^ 

Proudhon  was  a  man  of  audacity.  He  condemned  all  forms 
of  sentiment,  particularly  love.  According  to  him,  the  adoration 
of  a  woman,  whoever  she  might  be,  was  a  vice.^^  Love  could 
be  justified  only  under  one  condition — that  is,  it  should  be  steeped 
in  justice.^^  The  way  by  which  we  may  realize  this  idea  is  by 
marriage.  The  conjugal  couple  is,  in  effect,  an  organ  of  justice, 
bound  together  by  a  compact  of  absolute  devotion.^"  In  1849, 
when  he  was  still  confined  in  prison,  he  married  Mile.  Euphasie 
Piegard,  a  lace  maker  without  any  fortune.  His  family  life  was 
devoted  and  simple.*^  Faithful  to  his  idea,  he  did  not  give 
sentiment  any  part.  "I  have  married,"  he  said  later,  "a  young 
and  poor  working  woman,  not  through  love  but  through  sympathy 

for  her  position,  through  esteem  of  her  personality 

Instead  of  love,  I  had  the  vision  of  home  and  paternity."  *^ 

The  intellectual  achievement  of  Proudhon  between  1848  and 
1852  is  still  greater.  While  heretofore  denying  the  justification 
of  property,  he  did  not  tell  us  what  was  going  to  take  its  place. 
His  problem  now  was  to  search  for  a  philosophy  that  would  be 
both  positive  and  constructive,  instead  of  negative  and  destruct- 
ive.^^ With  this  end  in  view,  Proudhon  devoted  his  whole 
attention  to  the  solution  of  social  and  economic  problems.  In 
1848,  he  published  "La  solution  du  probleme  social,"  "Organ- 
isation du  credit  et  de  la  circulation,"  "Banque  du  peuple"  and 
"Banque  d'echange." 


37  Desjardin  I,  pp.  135-137.    Bougie,  p.  172.    Miilberger  "Studien,"  p.  28. 

38  Corresp.  VIII,  p.  374. 

39  Justice  IV,  pp.  11  and  132. 

^^Ibid:  II,  p.  5.    See  also  Justice  IV,  p.  11  and  97. 

41  Desjardin  I,  pp.  142-143. 

42  Corresp.  VI,  p.  8. 

*3  ".  .  .  il  ne  suffit  pas  que  la  critique  dcmolisse,  il  faut  qu'elle  affirme  et 
reconstruise.  Sans  cela,  le  socialisme  resterait  un  objet  de  pure  curiosite, 
alarmant  pour  la  bourgeoisie,  et  sans  utilite  pour  le  peuple  .  .  ." 

".  .  .  Id  precede  par  lequel  I'esprit  affirme  n'est  pas  le  meme  que  celui 
par  lequel  il  nie ;  il  fallait,  avant  de  batir,  sortir  de  la  contradiction,  e!t 


\ 


46  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhox 

All  primary  material,  according  to  him,  is  furnished  gratui- 
tously by  nature  to  man.  Labor  is  productive;**  but  capital  is 
not.  All  the  products  are  the  result  of  labor.*^  Interest  is,  there- 
fore, unjustifiable.  The  debtor  will  pay  the  creditor  something 
for  nothing.*"  The  loaning  of  capital  .and  the  discounting  of 
paper  cannot,  and  must  not,  give  place  to  interest  in  exchange. 
For  the  purpose  of  putting  his  idea  into  practice,  on  January  31, 
1849,  Proudlion  founded  the  peoples'  bank  (banqiie  dii  peuple)  on 
the  basis  of  gratuitous  credit.  Being  condemned  to  three  years' 
imprisonment  later  in  the  same  year,  he  was  obliged  to  give  up 
the  enterprise.*'^ 

In  July,  1851,  he  published  "L'idee  generale  de  la  revolution 
au  XIX  siecle,"  in  which  the  principle  of  social  liquidation  was 
clearly  set  forth.  By  reducing,  simplifying,  decentralizing  and 
suppressing  one  after  another  all  the  wheels  of  the  great  machine 
which  we  call  the  government  or  the  state,  Proudhon  hoped  to 
realize  his  aim,  by  which  the  governmental  system  would  be 
submerged  into  the  economic  system.*^  In  1852  he  published 
another  book,  "La  Revolution  sociale  demontree  par  le  coup 
d'Etat  du  2  Decembre."  In  this  work  he  also  laid  great  stress 
upon  the  substitution  of  economics  for  politics,  and  public  interest 
for  authority.*^ 

Beside  his  general  literary  activity,  Proudhon  resumed  a  very 
active  journalistic  life  between  1847  and  1850.     He  acted  first 


creer  une  methode  d'invention  revolutionnaire,  une  philosophic,  non  plus 
negative,  mais  pour  emprunter  le  langage  de  M.  Auguste  Comte,  positive." 
"Confession  de  la  Revolution,"  pp.  125-126. 

^*  Solution  du  Probleme  Social,  p.  260  and  the  following. 

i^Ibid:  p.  263.    Melange  III.  185-336  (see  especially  pp.  219  and  235). 

46Putlitz,  p.  38. 

*7  Beaucherey,  p.  XI.  Desjardin  I,  pp.  133-134.  Mulberger  "P.  J. 
Proudhon,"  pp.  137-138.  For  further  detail  of  the  people's  bank,  see 
H.  Denis,  "Proudhon  et  les  Principes  de  la  Banque  d'echange,"  Annales 
de  I'institut  des  sciences  sociales  de  Bruxelles,  premiere  annee,  and  C.  A. 
Dana,  "Proudhon  and  his  Bank  of  the  People,"  N.  Y.,  1896. 

*8  Idee  Generale,  p.l96.     (See  also  Desjardin  I,  p.  176.) 

«  Desjardin  I,  pp.  200-201. 


The  Period  of  Anarchism  47 

as  a  collaborator  on  "The  Representative  of  the  People,"  then 
as  editor-in-chief  of  "The  People,"  and  finally  as  contributor  to 
"The  Voice  of  the  People"  and  "The  People  of  1850."  War  on 
socialism !  ^°  War  on  the  anarchy  of  privilege !  ^^  End  of  pov- 
erty, and  accession  of  the  reign  of  justice !  ^^  Thus  Proudhon 
fought  passionately  against  the  old  order.  All  four  papers  were 
in  turn  suppressed  by  the  government  as  anarchistic  and  obnox- 
ious.^^ 

(z)  The  period  of  construction  (1853-1861). 

In  1852,  Proudhon  was  set  free  from  prison.^*  Although 
opposing  the  coup  d'Etat  of  1851,^^  and  denouncing  Louis 
Napoleon  as  reactionary  and  tyrannical,^*^  he  entertained  in  1852 
the  hope  of  utilizing  him  for  the  realization  of  his  social  reform." 
The  election  of  1857  not  being  favorable  to  the  imperial  gov- 
ernment, Proudhon  thereupon  promptly  abandoned  his  idea  of 
marrying  the  second  empire  with  the  social  revolution.^^ 

In  the  field  of  learning,  Proudhon  reached  the  stage  of  matur- 
ity about  the  year  1853.  His  writings  became  more  calm  and 
academic.  His  bitter  and  passionate  style  now  appeared  only 
occasionally  in  his  polemic  writings.  His  thought  also  became 
more  systematic  and  clear.  If  not  abandoning  his  preliminary 
ideas,  he  at  least  developed  some  new  ideas  of  which  he  himself 
might  not  have  recognized  the  importance.  The  idea  of  progress 
was  very  well  set  forth  in  his  "Philosophie  du  Progres,"  pub- 
lished in  1853.^^    In  1858  he  wrote  another  book,  "De  la  Justice 


5^  Ibid:  II,  p.  155. 

51  Melange  I,  p.  136. 

52  Diehl,  pp.  37-38. 

53  For  further  details  see  Diehl,  pp.  37-39,  and  Desjardin  I,  pp.  119-121. 
5*  Desjardin  I,  pp.  150-151.    Mulberger,  "P.  J.  Proudhon,"  p.  165. 
^^Ibid:  I,  p.  182. 

56  Ibid:  I,  pp.  192-193. 

57 /&,•(/.•  I,  pp.  188-192. 

58/&jrf;  I,  p.  244. 

59  Miilberger  "P.  J.  Proudhon,"  p.  174 


48  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

dans  la  Revolution  et  dans  I'eglise,"  in  which  his  anarchic  idea 
of  the  reign  of  justice  was  highly  developed.^" 

Shortly  after  the  publication  of  this  work  he  was  declared 
guilty  of  five  misdemeanors: — (1)  For  outraging  public  and 
religious  morality,  and  attacking  the  rights  of  the  family;  (2) 
for  justifying  acts  condemned  by  criminal  law,  (3)  for 
attacking  the  respect  due  to  law,  (4)  for  exciting  the  hatred  of 
the  people  against  each  other,  and  (5)  for  publishing  false  news, 
faithlessly  invented.^^  Besides  these  charges  he  was  also  declared 
guilty  of  two  misdemeanors  after  the  pubhcation  of  his  pamphlet, 
"Petition  to  the  Senate": — ^-(1)  For  outraging  public  and  relig- 
ious morality,  and  (2)  for  outraging  and  deriding  a  religion,  the 
establishment  of  which  was  legally  recognized  in  France.^^  In 
consequence  he  was  condemned  to  three  years  of  imprisonment 
and  a  fine  of  4,000  francs.®* 

Proudhon  intended  to  write  a  memoir  to  the  judges  of  appeal. 
But  he  could  not  find  any  printer  for  its  publication.  He  fled  to 
Brussels,  Belgium,  on  July  28,  1858,  under  the  name  of  M. 
Durfart,  professor  of  mathematics.®^  Here  he  wrote  constantly 
for  "L'office  de  publicite."®®  In  the  conflict  over  the  Italian 
question,  he  published  an  article  on  July  12,  1862,  entitled  "A'laz- 
zini  and  Italian  unity."  ®^  In  this  article  he  strongly  advocated 
the  principle  of  federation  in  opposition  to  that  of  unity.®®  Many 
of  the  influential  Belgian  newspapers  thereupon  accused  him  of 

^  For  a  general  view  of  this  work,  see  Miilberger  "P.  J.  Proudhon"  pp. 
181-191. 

61  Desjardin  II,  p.  5. 

62  This  pamphlet  was  published  on  May  11,  1858.  Desjardin  II,  p.  4. 
In  this  pamphlet  Proudhon  demanded  the  revision  of  the  Treaty  of  Con- 
cordat.    IMiilberger  "P.  J.  Proudhon,"  p.  199 

62  Desjardin  II,  pp.  4-5. 
^*Ibid:  II,  p.  6. 
65/6t"d;  II,  pp.  7-8. 
66  Lagarde,  p.  38. 

6^  This  article  is  printed  in  his  "Oeuvres  Completes,"  volume  16,  pp. 
128-147. 

88  PutUtz,  p.  120. 


The  Period  of  Construction  49 

preaching  the  annexation  of  Belgium  to  France.  On  September 
16,  1862,  a  group  of  men  and  women  stopped  at  his  residence 
and  cried  out  in  an  impressive  manner,  "Long  live  the  Belgians ! 
Down  with  the  annexationists  \"  ®^  Three  days  later  Proudhon 
left  Belgium  for  France,  to  which  the  supplementary  imperial  act 
of  1860  to  the  amnesty  of  1859  gave  him  free  access/" 

(b)  Proudhon  as  a  federalist  (1862-1865). 

Although  Proudhon  had  since  1840  repeatedly  declared  him- 
self an  anarchist,  his  theory  of  anarchy  gradually  gave  way  to 
that  of  federalism.  Both  in  "De  la  justice  dans  la  Revolution 
et  dans  I'Eglise"  and  in  "La  Guerre  et  la  Paix"  (published  in 
1861)  the  idea  of  federation  was  vaguely  hinted  at.  It  was 
only  in  the  year  1862,  however,  that  Proudhon  made  known  to 
his  friend  that  if  he  began  with  the  idea  of  anarchism  he  would 
end  with  the  principle  of  federalism.^^  Both  in  his  "Du  principe 
federatif"  (1863)  and  in  "De  la  capacite  politique  des  classes 
ouvrieres"  (1865),^^  federalism  as  a  definite  principle  was  clearly 
set  out. 

In  style,  as  well  as  in  substance,  Proudhon's  work  after  1.862 
was  distinctly  marked  with  scholarly  thought  and  profundity, 
especially  in  the  last  two  works  mentioned.  He  died  on  January 
19,  1865,  in  Paris." 


69Desjardin  II,  p.  42.    Miilberger  "P.  J.  Proudhon,"  pp.  209-211. 

''^  Lagarde,  p.  40.  The  amnesty  law  of  1859  pardoned  only  those  whose 
crime  was  political.  Proudhon  was  excluded  from  this  law  because  his 
crime  was  not  political  but  moral.  He  wrote,  as  charged  by  the  govern- 
ment, immoral  books.  Through  a  special  imperial  act  in  1860  supple- 
mentary to  the  amnesty  law  of  1859,  Proudhon  was  also  pardoned  by  the 
government.     Miilberger  "P.  J.  Proudhon,"  pp.  200  and  211. 

'1  Letter  of  Nov.  1862,  to  his  friend. 

72  Desjardin  II,  pp.  54-60.  See  also  Miilberger  "P.  J.  Proudhon,"  pp. 
212-237. 

73  Desjardin,  II,  p.  66.    Putlitz,  p.  126. 


CHAPTER  III. 
Proudhon's  General  Philosophical  Ideas. 

Every  thinker  normally  cherishes  certain  basic  ideas  from 
which  he  develops  his  other  notions,  political  or  otherwise.  The 
basic  ideas  of  Proudhon  relate  to  five  topics :  (1)  The  supremacy 
of  economics  over  politics ;  (2)  progress;  (3)  liberty;  (4)  equal- 
ity; and  (5)  justice. 

(1)  The  supremacy  of  economics  over  politics. 

Proudhon,  born  in  an  age  of  industry  and  commerce,  did  not 
fail  to  grasp  the  growing  importance  of  economic  developments. 
Throughout  his  work  he  constantly  emphasized  the  supremacy  of 
economics  over  poHtics.  According  to  him,  the  basis  of  society 
is  economic  rather  than  political.  "Over  and  above  the  political 
phantoms  which  captivate  our  imagination,"  said  he,  "there  are 
the  phenomena  of  social  economics  which,  by  their  harmony  or 
discord,  produce  the  good  or  the  evil  in  society."  ^  In  a  pro- 
letarian democracy,  the  powers  of  government  will  gradually 
disappear;  whereas  the  idea  of  labor,  of  free  contract,  will 
become  the  dominant  idea  of  the  day.  Politics  will  then  be  the 
corollary  of  economics."^ 

(2)  Progress. 

Progress  in  its  purest  form,  according  to  Proudhon,  is  the 
movement  of  ideas,  movement  spontaneous  and  indestructible.^ 
In  all  society  there  are  always  two  groups  of  ideas,  the  one  new 

1  Idee  Generale,  p.  42. 

^Ibid:  p.  123  and  140.  Capacite,  p.  145.  In  1849  Proudhon  thought 
that  politics  and  political  economy  were  one  and  the  same  science,  the 
first  more  personal,  arbitrary"  or  subjective;  the  second  more  real  and 
positive.     (Melange  III,  p.  37.) 

3  Philosophic  du  Progres,  p.  19. 


Theory  of  Progress  51 

and  the  other  old.     The  old  ideas  dominate.     In  opposition  to 
them  there  arises  a  group  of  new  ideas  which  constitute  the  ideas 
of  future  society.    Thus  from  fetichism  to  polytheism,  from  poly- 
theism to  Christianity,   from  Christianity  to  philosophy,   from 
philosophy  to  democracy,  the  world  is  perpetually  in  motion.* 
Truth  is  only  transitory  and  relative.^     There  is  no  absolute 
or  eternal  truth  except  the  law  of  movement.®     What  for  us  is 
a  reality  today  may  be  only  a  Utopia  tomorrow.     All  ideas  will/ 
be  false  if  they  are  considered  as  fixed,  complete,  unalterable,!  ^^ 
not    susceptible    of    modification,    conversion,    augmentation    oq 
diminution.     On  the  other  hand,  all  ideas  will  be  true  if  they  \ 
are  considered  susceptible  of  fuller  realization,  of  becoming  more  j 
useful  and  of  undergoing  change.'' 

Progress,  therefore,  is  co-eternal  with  the  universe  as  well^— -^ 
as  with  humanity.     The  universe,  infinite  in  its  nature,  is  per-*- — ^ 
petually  changing.     The  law  of  equilibrium  which  governs  the 
universe  does  not  impose  upon  it  the  state  of  uniformity  andV^ 
unalterableness.     On  the  contrary,   it  assures  to  it  a  state  of 
eternal  change  by  the  economy  of  forces  which  are  infinite.     So 
is  the  case  with  humanity.     We  do  not  march  to  an  ideal  per- 
fection or  to  a   static  state.     We  are  carried  along  with  the 
universe  in  an  incessant  transformation.     The  more  our  intel-    . 
ligence  and  morality  are  developed  the  more  gloriously  will  this 
transformation  be  accomplished.     Progress  is  the  law  of  our 
soul,  not  in  the  sense  that  by  the  perfection  of  ourselves  we 
may  without  interruption  approach  absolute  justice  and  the  ideal, 
but  in  the  sense  that  humanity,  as  creation  itself,  changes  and    . 
develops  without  end  the  ideas  of  justice  and  of  beauty,  whichv*^ 
we  shall  always  change  and  expand.* 

Progress  is  also  continuous.     In  opposition  to  the  old  ideas, -'^ 
society,  if  it  is  progressive,  will  produce  new  ideas  which,  instead 

*  Melange  II,  p.  29. 

5  Philosophic  du  Progres,  p.  98. 

^Ihid:  pp.  90-91. 

"flhid:  pp.  22  and  24. 

8  Justice  I,  p.  51. 


52  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

of  destroying  the  old  ideas,  will  embrace  them,  generalize  them, 
and  rebuild  them.  In  this  way  society  incessantly  reproduces  new 
ideas  which  are  enriched  by  the  old.^ 

(3)   Liberty. 

The  social  and  democratic  republic  which  Proudhon  endeav- 
ored to  establish,  has  liberty  as  its  principle,  equality  as  ijsjueaas 
and  f  raternity^asjnrnd  ^° 

Let  us  consider  first  what  Proudhon  meant  by  "liberty." 
Proudhon  is  a  passionate  lover  of  liberty.  "O  liberty,"  he  once 
wrote,  "charm  of  my  existence!  Without  you  work  is  torture 
and  life  a  long  death.""  "Man  is  a  being  of  liberty  and  indi- 
viduality above  all."^^ 

Liberty  is,  in  the  first  place,  immanent.  It  is  to  man  what 
impenetrability  is  to  matter.^^  It  is  an  absolute  inherent  right  and 
exists  before  all  social  order.  While  laws  and  regulations  con- 
stitute obstacles  to  it,  other  social  institutions  give  impulse  to 
its  development.  But  neither  the  one  nor  the  other  can  create 
what  is  not  already  immanent.^* 

In  the  second  place,  liberty  is  inviolable.  We  can  neither 
sell  nor  alienate  our  liberty;  every  contract,  every  condition  of  a 
contract,  which  has  in  view  the  alienation  or  suspension  of  liberty 
is  null :  the  moment  a  slave  plants  his  foot  upon  the  soil  of 
liberty,  at  that  very  moment  he  becomes  a  free  man.  When 
society  seizes  a  malefactor  and  deprives  him  of  his  liberty,  society 
makes  use  of  a  legitimate  defense:  whoever  violates  the  social 
compact  by  the  commission  of  a  crime,  declares  himself  a  public 
enemy;  in  attacking  the  liberty  of  others,  he  compels  them  to 
take  away  his  own.  Liberty  is  the  original  condition  of  man; 
to  renounce  liberty  is  to  renounce  the  nature  of  man;  without 
liberty  how  could  we  perform  the  acts  of  man.^^ 

9  Melange  II,  p.  12. 

lo/fetd;  I,  p.  137. 

"  Cont.   Eco.  II,  287. 

i^Les  Majorats  Litteraires,  p.  46  (in  the  note). 

^3  What  is  Property,  p.  72. 

1*  Cont.  Eco.  I,  pp.  143-147. 

15  What  is  Property,  p.  67. 


Liberty  Defined  53 

Furthermore,  liberty  is  progressive  in  its  development,  infinite 
and  absolute  in  its  essence  and  in  its  ideal.  It  is  soul,  life,  spon- 
taneity, and  movement  itself  .^^  There  is  no  positive  liberty  which 
will  remain  static.  Liberty  is,  essentially,  practical  and  active. 
It  tends  to  decline  when  it  delivers  itself  to  submission  and  in- 
difference.^^ 

Then,  too,  liberty  is  social.  It  exists  only  in  society.^^  The 
more  society  becomes  organized,  the  greater  will  become  the 
number  of  those  who  participate  in  administration  and  in  social 
activities,  the  more  complete  will  become  the  liberty  of  the  in- 
dividual.^^ 

And  in  the  fifth  place,  liberty  is  infinite  variety.  It  respects 
all  the  wills  without  the  limitation  of  any  law.~°  It  permits 
man  to  vary  his  activities  according  to  his  desire,  and  to  govern 
his  existence  according  to  an  ideal  which  will  play  a  role 
analogous  to  that  of  instinct  with  the  animal.^^ 

So  much  for  the  nature  of  liberty.  We  now  come  to  the 
question  of  what  are  its  functions.  The  functions  of  liberty  are 
dual;  one  negative,  the  other  positive.^^  Negatively  liberty  is 
anarchy. 2^  It  knows  no  authority,  no  reason,  and  no  principle 
other  than  itself.  To  laws  of  the  world,  and  of  thoughts  which 
beset  it,  it  says  "no";  to  love  which  seduces,  "no";  to  the  order 
of  the  prince,  the  voice  of  the  priests,  the  cry  of  the  multitude, 
"no,  no,  no."  It  is  the  eternal  contradictor,  in  opposition  to  all 
thought  and  all  force  which  tends  to  dominate  it.  It  is  the 
indomitable  insurgent  which  has  no  faith  in  anything  except 
itself.24 

"Melange  I,  p.  137. 
"  Justice  III,  p.  270. 

18  What  is  Property,  p.  268.    "Liberty  is  equality,  because  liberty  exists 
only  in  society;  and  in  the  absence  of  equality,  there  is  no  society." 
1^  E.  Fourniere,  p.  126. 

20  What  is  Property,  p.  268. 

21  Justice  III,  p.  228. 

22  Ibid:  III,  p.  230  and  528. 

23  What  is  Property,  p.  268. 
2*  Justice  III,  pp.  229-230. 


54  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

Positively,  the  function  of  liberty  resides  in  the  achievement 
of  rights  which  will  accelerate  its  development.  The  rights 
demanded  by  it  are  liberty  of  religion,  liberty  of  conscience, 
liberty  of  thought,  liberty  of  speech,  liberty  of  press,  liberty  of 
association,  liberty  of  work,  liberty  of  teaching,  and  liberty  of 
commerce  and  industry.^^ 

Yet  to  Proudlion  liberty  is  not  unlimited.  He  insists  that 
liberty  is  not  synonymous  with  license.  It  has  its  limitations 
as  well  as  its  guarantees.  "As  the  declaration  of  rights,"  said  he, 
"I  define  liberty  as  the  right  of  doing  what  does  not  injure 
others. "^^  In  another  place  he  said,  "The  unlimited  liberty  of 
man  has  for  its  limit  respect  for  the  liberty  of  others."  ^^  Still 
more  emphatically  Proudhon  discussed  the  guarantees  of  liberty. 
"Liberty,"  wrote  he,  "can  have  no  guarantee  except  in  the  pro- 
gressive abolition  of  governmental  institutions  and  the  parallel 
creation  of  economic  institutions.^^  In  this  new  economic  regime, 
liberty  will  be  surrounded  with  all  the  guarantees  of  sincerity, 
mutuality  and  equality  which  economic  rights  demand.^° 

This  study  of  liberty,  however,  though  we  have  already  dis- 
cussed its  nature,  function  and  guarantees,  is  not  yet  complete. 
We  have  still  to  add  two  other  significant  points :  the  one,  the 
relationship  existing  between  liberty  and  justice,  and  the  other, 
the  relationship  existing  between  liberty  and  unity,  or  order. 
Between  liberty  and  justice  the  relationship  is  very  close.  It  is 
through  justice  that  liberty  multiplies  its  power;  it  is  also  through 
liberty  that  justice,  idealizing  itself,  acquires  this  penetrating 
virtue  which  makes  it  the  most  deep-rooted  of  our  inclinations 
and  the  most  sublime  of  our  ideals.^"  The  submission  of  man 
to  justice  will  result  in  the  formation  of  a  freer  personality  for 
him.^^     In  other  words,  man  will  develop  his  personality  by  the 

25  Melange  I,  p.  46,  190-191. 
28  Melange  I,  p.  45. 

27  Idee  Revolutionnaire  I,  p.  302. 

28  A.  Bertrand — "Proudhon  et  les  Lj'onnais,"  pp.  9-10,  Lettre  a  Laloge. 

29  Capacite,  p.  208. 

30  Justice  III,  pp.  9  and  39. 
"/fetd;  I,  p.  198. 


Doctrine  of  Equality  55 

realization  of  social  justice.^^  The  relationship  existing  between  ^ 
liberty  and  unity  or  order  is  still  closer.  These  two  concepts  are 
indissolubly  connected  with  each  other  for  all  eternity.  We  can 
neither  separate  the  one  from  the  other,  nor  absorb  the  one  in 
the  other.^^  What  we  need  to  do  is  to  find  a  state  of  social 
equality  in  which  liberty  will  exist  in  unity,  in  order,  and  in 
independence.^* 

(4)  Equality. 

The  theory  of  equality  has  been  given  three  interpretations: 
(1)  The  communistic,  (2)  Rousseau's,  and  (3)  Proudhon's.  The 
first  considers  equality  as  real  and  immediate;  the  second  as 
personal,  and  the  third  as  commutative  and  progressive.^^  What 
concerns  us  here  is  the  theory  of  Proudhon.  Men,  according  to 
him,  are  born  equal  in  essence,  in  quality,  in  type,^®  in  dignity, 
and  in  right.^^  Inequality  is  due  to  three  chief  causes:  (1) 
Psychological  or  intellectual,  (2)  economic,  and  (3)  social. 

Psychologically,  the  intellectual  faculties  as  among  individ- 
uals and  among  races  are  unequal.^®  At  least,  the  development  of 
these  faculties  is  not  the  same  for  all,  one  showing  more  precocity, 
another  less.^^  Intellectual  inequality,  neutralizing  political  equal- 
ity, leads  in  its  turn  to  honorary  distinctions  and  titles  of  nobility ; 
in  short,  to  political  inequality.*"  It  also  leads  to  economic  in- 
equality, to  inequality  in  fortunes  and  in  conditions.*^ 

Economic  property  is  the  chief  cause  of  political  inequality. 
If  you  wish  to  enjoy  political  equality,  abolish  property.*^     So 

32Puech— "Le  Proudhonism,"  pp.  242-243. 

33  Capacite,  p.  147. 

3*  Celebration  du  Dimanche,  p.  151. 

35  Philosophic  du  Progres,  pp.  54-55. 

36  Justice  I,  p.  303. 

37  What  is  Property  (second  memoir)  p.  278.  Justice  III,  p.  114. 
Theorie  de  la  propriete,  p.  146. 

38  Capacite,  p.  40. 

3*  Theorie  de  la  Propriete,  p.  147. 

*"La  Guerre  et  la  Paix,  p.  45. 

*i  Theorie  de  la  Propriete,  p.  147. 

*2  What  is  Property,  pp.  60-61.    See  also  Theorie  de  la  Propriete,  146. 


56  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

long  as  economic  inequality  subsists,  political  equality  will  be 
simply  a  myth.^* 

Socially,  the  chief  cause  of  inequality  is  the  realization,  in 
society,  of  the  three  abstractions — capital,  labor,  and  talent. 
While  society  is  divided  into  three  categories  of  citizens,  cor- 
responding to  the  terms  of  this  formula,  that  is  to  say,  into 
capitalists,  laborers,  and  men  of  capacity,  it  gives  rise  to  the 
distinction  of  castes.  In  the  caste  system  the  laborers  are  enslaved 
by  tlie  capitalists.  These  laborers  are  called  in  turn  slaves,  serfs, 
pariahs,  plebeians,  and  proletarians.  The  capitalists  are  the  ex- 
ploiters ;  they  are  called  in  turn  patricians,  nobles  and  bourgeoisie. 
The  men  of  talent  are  parasites,  agents  of  corruption  and  of 
servitude;  they  have  been  first  the  pagan  priests,  later  the 
Christian  clergies  and  today  are  the  public  functionaries." 

Proudhon  is  a  passionate  lover  of  liberty  and  equality.  For 
the  question  of  intellectual  inequality  he  has  tv^o  solutions :  one 
theoretical  and  the  other  practical. 

Theoretically,  Proudhon  first  insists  upon  the  idea  that  in- 
tellectual inequality  is  only  accidental.  All  men  have  the  same 
capacities.  They  are  not  born  unequal.  Inequality  is  created 
by  the  circumstances  under  which  they  are  bom  and  developed.*^ 
Intellectual  inequality,  in  the  second  place,  is  only  transitory. 
The  tendency  of  society  is  toward  the  equalizing  of  intelligence 
as  well  as  toward  the  equalizing  of  conditions.  Moreover,  the 
equality  of  talents  and  of  capacities  is  the  norm  of  the  collective 
reason  of  which  we  are  severally  the  manifestations.'*^  And  in 
the  third  place,  intellectual  inequality  is  neutralized  by  the  equal- 
izing effects  of  their  diversified  functions.  One  man,  for  ex- 
ample, possesses  only  physical  strength,  whereas  another  possesses 
greater  mental  power.  The  first  may  be  a  successful  farmer,  the 
second  a  successful  manufacturer  or  navigator.  In  both  these 
cases  there  exists  a  source  of  free  competition,  of  natural  equi- 


ps Justice  II,  pp.  4  and  172. 

*4  Melange  I,  p.  183. 

<5  Justice  I,  p.  303. 

*8  Creation  de  I'ordre,  p.  282  et  suiv. 


Doctrine  of  Equality  57 

librium,  in  which  the  difference  in  the  capacity  and  skill  of  the 
worker,  and  in  the  capacity  or  quality  of  the  work  done  dis- 
appears, because  both  of  them  have  tried  their  best  and  have 
done  their  duty.  The  impotence  in  the  individual  may  be  balanced 
by  the  collective  forces  of  society.*^ 

Practically,  Proudhon  expected  gradually  to  bring  about  intel-     f) 
lectual  equality  through  the  development  of  popular  education — '■ . 
the  same  education  for  all  the  people.'** 

In  relation  to  political  and  economic  inequality  Proudhon's 
doctrine  changed  no  less  than  two  times.  In  1849  he  thought 
that  there  was  an  intimate  relationship  existing  between  political 
and  economic  equality.  Where  either  one  of  them  is  denied,  the 
other  will  disappear;  and  conversely,  whether  either  one  of  them 
prevails,  the  other  will,  sooner  or  later,  triumph.*^  In  1858, 
however,  he  changed  his  idea.  He  then  believed  economic  equal- 
ity to  be  the  basis  of  political  equality.  We  could  not  have  the 
latter  unless  we  had  first  achieved  the  former.  Political  guar- 
antees would,  in  an  unorganized  society,  only  add  to  the  in- 
stability of  the  state,  and  keep  the  way  always  open  for  usurpation 
and  despotism.^*'  Then  in  1865,  he  reverted  to  the  converse  of 
the  notion  of  1858,  believing  that  democracy  would  lead  to  econ- 
omic equality.  Once  political  equality  was  assured  through  the 
exercise  of  universal  suffrage,  the  tendency  of  the  nation  would 
be  toward  economic  equality.^^ 

Proudhon,  therefore,  entertained  two  contradictory  ideas  as 
to  the  manner  in  which  equality  might  be  achieved:  (1)  Econ- 
omic equality,  as  a  result  of  economic  transformation,  will  lead 
to  political  equality,  and  (2)  political  equality,  as  a  result  of 
political  reform,  will  lead  to  economic  equality.  With  these  views 
in  mind  we  may  consider  what  were  Proudhon's  economic  re- 
forms. 

*7  Celebration  du  Dimanche,  p.  148.    Lettre  a  Blanqui,  p.  6.     See  also 
Les  Majorats  Litteraires,  p.  14  and  Bougie,  p.  104. 

48  Theorie  de  la  Propriete,  p.  146.     See  also  Idee  Generale,  pp.  96-97. 

49  Melange  I,  p.  11 5. 

50  Justice  II,  pp.  4  and  172. 

51  Capacite,  p.  214. 


58  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

Economic  right,  according  to  him,  is  the  necessary  counter- 
part of  political  right.^^  In  order  to  have  political  equality,  as 
already  mentioned,  it  is  necessary  for  us  to  create  economic 
equality.  The  basis  of  economic  equality  is  justice.  By  justice, 
Proudhon  here  means  the  maintenance  of  an  economic  equi- 
librium— a  balance  between  interests  and  services  in  society.^^ 
Instead  of  being  subordinated  one  to  the  other,  the  services  of 
society  must  be  reciprocal — reciprocal  in  property,  in  labor, 
in  education,  in  credit,  in  exchange,  in  taxation,  in  power,  in 
judgment.^^  With  justice  and  reciprocity  as  his  basic  ideas,  he 
endeavored  to  bring  about  economic  equality  through  the  follow- 
ing reforms: — 

(1)  Industrial  reforms: 

a.  The  right  to  labor  guaranteed  to  everyone."^ 

b.  The  division  of  labor.^^ 

c.  The  suppression  of  the  distinction  between  labor  and 

capital  by  the  equalizing  of  wage  and  product." 


57 


(2)   Commercial  reforms : 

a.  The   organization  of   credit  and  exchange,^®   on  the 

basis  of  reciprocity. 

b.  The  abolition  of  the  system  of  purchase  and  sale  by 

fixing  in  advance  the  exact  price  of  each  commodity 
by  the  producer-consumers.^^ 

82  Du  Principe  f ederatif,  p.  107. 

63  Justice  I,  p.  381. 

"Desjardin  I,  pp.  256-257  ("Nouveau  Principe"  passim). 

65  What  is  Property,  pp.  228  and  238. 

66  Idee  Gencrale,  pp.  96-97.  "Exchange  of  commerce  leads  to  equaUty." 
(What  is  Property,  p.  294.) 

67  Melange  I,  p.  183.  Dcsjardin  I,  pp.  256-257.  "Le  salaire,  dans  le 
travailleur  collectif,  est  cgal  au  produit :  consequement  les  produits  de 
tons  Ics  travailleurs  sont  egcuix  cntre  cux,  et  leur  salaires  encore  egaux : 
la  est  le  principe  de  I'egalite  des  conditions  et  des  fortunes."  Cont.  Eco. 
II,  p.  290.  "What  is  then,  to  practice  justice?  It  is  to  give  equal  wealth 
to  each,  on  condition  of  equal  labor.    "What  is  Property?"  p.  228. 

68  Idee  Generalc,  pp.  96-97. 
68  Desjardin  I,  pp.  256-257. 


Doctrine  of  Equality  59 

(3)  The  transformation  of  property  with  the  following  ends 
in  view: 

a.  Equalizing  of  possession. 

b.  Equalizing  of  economic  conditions.^" 

The  result  of  these  economic  reforms,  according  to  Proudhon, 
would  be  threefold:  (1)  Political  equality,  everyone  having  the 
same  right;  (2)  economic  equality,  everyone  living  financially 
under  the  same  conditions;  and  (3)  social  equality,  everyone 
being  compelled  to  work,  there  being  no  more  capitalists,  laborers, 
or  artisans,  everyone  being  at  one  and  the  same  time  capitalist 
and  laborer.^^ 

Passing  from  Proudhon's  economic  reforms,  we  may  now 
consider  his  political  reforms.  According  to  his  theory,  intel- 
lectual inequality  leads  to  economic  and  political  inequality.  But 
the  development  of  civilization  tends  to  restrict  the  effect  of  this 
inequality.  In  other  words,  there  is  a  general  effort  on  the  part 
Df  humanity  to  realize  equality.  The  principle  of  equality  before 
the  law  is,  first,  unanimously  consented  to  by  the  people.  The 
operation  of  this  principle,  in  the  society  of  justice  and  order, 
tends  to  reduce  the  inequality  of  conditions  and  of  fortunes  to 
the  equality  of  services  and  products.  In  short,  it  tends  to  make 
prevalent  the  idea  that  the  fortune  of  the  citizen  will  not  be 
the  expression  of  his  capacity  or  virtue,  but  of  his  work.^^ 

So  far  we  have  discussed  Proudhon's  theory  of  equality  and 
[lis  plans  for  its  realization.  We  come,  now,  to  the  question  of 
whether  absolute  equality  can  be  realized.  To  this  question 
Proudhon's  answer  is  different  at  different  times.  In  1840  he 
would  have  said,  "Yes,  it  can  be  realized."  "We  see,"  he  em- 
phatically declared,  "that  equality  is  constantly  being  realized 
without  our  knowledge,  even  at  the  very  moment  when  we  are 
pronouncing  it  incapable  of  realization;  that  the  time  is  drawing 
near  when,  without  any  effort  or  even  wish  of  ours,  we  shall 

60  Revol.  Social.,  p.  180. 

61  Melange  I,  p.  283. 

62Theorie  de  la  Propriete,  pp.  146-147. 


6o  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

have  it  universally  established;  that  with  it,  in  it  and  by  it,  the 
natural  and  true  political  order  must  make  itself  manifest."^^ 

But  after  1858,  his  answer  became  more  cautious.  In  his 
"De  la  Justice  dans  la  Revolution  et  dans  I'Eglise,"  he  said, 
"From  the  first  equality,  the  equality  of  products  and  of  wages, 
we  may  deduce  the  final  equality,  as  approximately  as  the  infinite 
variety  of  individuals,  their  capacities,  and  increasing  human 
development  will  permit."®* 

Again  in  1861,  in  his  "Theory  of  Imposts,"  he  said:  "In- 
equality of  fortune  has  its  causes  not  alone  in  inheritance,  which 
carried  with  it  the  acquisition  of  fortune  by  sons  from  fathers, 
but  also  in  the  play  of  economic  forces,  in  the  initiative  of  the 
proprietor,  in  the  activity  and  intelligence  of  one  man  and  the 
awkwardness  and  indolence  of  another.  Absolute  equality  of 
fortune  cannot  be  realized  because  even  if  all  individuals  were 
equal  in  talent  and  capacity,  that  would  not  be  sufficient;  it 
would  still  be  necessary  to  make  the  environment  the  same  and 
equally  satisfying.  But  if  equality  cannot  be  achieved,  it  can 
at  least  be  approached."®^ 

And  finally,  in  1865,  he  came  to  the  definite  conclusion  that 
humanity  proceeds  only  by  approximations  which  arise  out  of 
(1)  the  equalizing  of  faculties  by  education,  by  the  division  of 
work  and  by  the  liberation  of  all  faculties;  (2)  the  equalizing 
of  fortune  by  freeing  industry  and  commerce;  (3)  the  equalizing 
of  taxation;  (4)  the  equalizing  of  property;  (5)  anarchy;  (6) 
non-religion,  or  non-mysticism,  and  (7)  indefinite  progress  in 
science,  right,  liberty,  honor  and  justice.®® 

It  is  rather  significant  to  note  here  that  what  Proudhon 
meant  by  equality  is  the  equality  of  men  only.  Woman,  according 
to  him,  is  not  only  physically,  but  also  morally  and  intellectually, 
inferior  to  man.®^  In  the  family,  husband  and  wife,  the  em- 
bryonic organ  of  justice,  form  one  body,  one  soul,  one  will,  one 

63  What  is  Property,  p.  158. 

64  Justice  I,  p.  283. 
esThcorie  dc  I'impot,  p.  283. 
68/fcid;  pp.  241-242. 
67Desjardin  I,  pp.  19,  270-271. 


Women  Inferior  6i 

intelligence.  They  ought  to  be  devoted  to  each  other,^^  but  the 
husband  should  have  the  right  of  life  and  death  over  his  wife.®^ 
Woman  has  no  right  to  participate  in  politics.  The  relationship 
existing  between  the  family  and  the  state  is  the  problem  for  her 
husband  to  solve.  She  can  only  interfere  in  an  indirect  manner 
through  secret  influences. 

The  reason  for  this  is  threefold.  In  the  first  place,  political 
problems  which  have  no  other  end  except  that  of  assuring  to  the 
people  all  the  guarantees  of  liberty,  of  property,  of  labor,  of 
commerce,  of  security  and  of  instruction,  are  exclusively 
problems  for  man  to  solve.  How  can  woman  be  consulted?  To 
suppose  that  the  reason  of  woman  could  balance  that  of  man  is 
contrary  to  nature  and  degrades  the  virility  of  man.  In  the 
second  place,  woman  is  by  nature  consecrated  to  functions  purely 
domestic.  To  give  her  the  privilege  of  exercising  public  functions 
is  to  degrade  the  modesty  of  the  family,  to  make  her  a  pubHc 
person,  to  proclaim  the  confusion  of  sexes,  the  communizing  of 
love,  the  abolition  of  family,  the  servility  of  persons  and  the 
infeudation  of  property.  In  the  third  place,  devotion  is,  in  the 
family,  the  absolute  rule.  If  husband  and  wife  are  one  body 
and  one  soul,  how  could  their  opinions  and  interests  be  different  ? 
To  suppose  that  woman  could  express,  in  the  assembly  of  the 
people,  any  opinion  contrary  to  that  of  her  husband,  is  to  suppose 
discord  between  them  and  to  prepare  for  their  divorce.'^" 

(5)  Justice. 

Religion  as  understood  by  Proudhon  defines  justice  as  a 
divine  command;  philosophy  as  a  simple  relation,  a  necessity  of 
reason.  Both  of  them  reduce  the  idea  of  justice  to  an  abstraction 
for  the  conscience.'^^     Proudhon's  interpretation  is  humanistic. 

68  "La  Guerre  .  .  ."  I,  pp.  58-59. 

69  "La  Pornocratie,"  p.  89. 

™  "La  Guerre  .  .  ."  I,  pp.  58-59.  We  may  note  in  passing  Proudhon's 
idea  of  fraternity.  Fraternity,  to  him,  is  progressive  and  absolute 
(Melange  I,  p.  139).  It  can  establish  itself  only  through  justice,  because 
justice  alone  is  the  condition,  means  and  law  of  liberty  and  fraternity. 
(Cont.  Eco.  I,  p.  226). 

71  Justice  II,  p.  96. 


62  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

According  to  him,  justice  is,  in  the  first  place,  immanent  in  the 
human  soul/^  It  is  not  simply  an  idea  of  human  relationship, 
or  an  abstract  notion  of  metaphysics.  It  is  human,  all  human, 
nothing  but  human."  It  is  a  fact  of  consciousness,  power,  an 
impulse  of  the  soul,  a  faculty  organic  and  positive.^'*  In  short, 
it  is  born  of  emotion  and  intellect  combined.'^^  It  is  a  reality.''*^ 
Still  more  paradoxically,  Proudhon  wrote  in  another  place, 
"Justice  is  for  man  the  principle  and  form  of  thought,  the 
guarantee  of  judgment,  the  rule  of  conduct,  the  aim  of  knowledge 
and  the  end  of  existence.  It  is  feeling  and  concept,  manifesta- 
tion and  law,  idea  and  fact.    It  is  universal  life  and  reason." 

Justice  is,  in  the  second  place,  reciprocal  or  social.  Man,  in 
virtue  of  the  reason  he  is  endowed  with  by  nature,  has  the  faculty 
of  feeling  his  dignity  in  the  person  of  his  equals  as  well  as  in 
his  own.  Justice  is  the  product  of  this  faculty.  It  is  the  respect, 
^  spontaneously  manifested  and  reciprocally  guaranteed,  of  human 
dignity  in  one's  own  person  as  well  as  in  that  of  his  neighbors. 
From  this  definition  of  justice,  Proudhon  deduced  the  principle 
of  right  and  duty.  Right  is  for  each  the  faculty  of  exacting 
from  others  respect  for  the  human  dignity  in  his  own  person; 
duty,  the  obligation  for  each  of  respecting  this  dignity  in  others." 
Thus  justice  is  social.  It  is  the  law  of  human  collectivity.'^^  It 
is  a  faculty  of  the  soul,  the  first  of  all  those  faculties  which 
constitute  the  social  being.«°  Through  the  sentiment  of  justice, 
each  of  us  feels  himself  as  an  individual,  and  collective,  being.^^ 
To  practice  justice  is  to  obey  the  social  instinct;  to  do  an  act 

"  "La  Guerre  .  .  ."  I.  p.  159. 

'■^"La  Guerre  .  .  ."  II.  pp.  305,  307;  Justice  I,  pp.  132,  141  and  227. 
'*  Justice,  I,  p.  142. 
^5  What  is   Property,  p.  228. 
"  Justice  II,  p.  97. 
''Ubid:  I,  p.  42  (see  also  p.  97). 

"  Justice  I,  pp.  216,  219,  225,  234,  III,   p.  227.     "La  Guerre  .  .    "  I 
pp.  159,  304-305.     What  is  Property,  p.  225. 
78  Desjardin  I,  p.  265. 
«°  Justice  I,  p.  227. 
"  Ibid:  I,  pp.  141  and  216. 


Justice  Defined  63 

of  justice  is  to  do  a  social  act.®^  Justice  is  also  reciprocal.  What 
fastens  the  bond  of  right  is  our  conscience,  which  keeps  us  from 
violating  the  dignity  of  our  neighbors  in  the  fear  of  violating  our 
own  and  destroying  ourselves  morally.  In  case  of  injury,  the 
criminal  is  responsible  to  himself  and  to  the  men  he  has  injured.^^ 

Justice,  in  the  third  place,  is  progressive.**  We  know  how  to 
discern  the  good  from  the  evil,  but  we  shall  never  see  the  end 
of  right,  or  of  justice,  because  we  shall  never  cease  to  create  new 
relations  between  ourselves.  We  are  born  perfectible,  but  we 
shall  never  become  perfect.  Perfection  and  unalterableness  will 
be  death.®^ 

Passing  from  the  chief  characteristics  of  justice,  as  under- 
stood by  Proudhon,  we  may  now  consider  its  function  in  society. 
Justice  is,  first  of  all,  the  basi?  of  social  cohesion.  Hobbes  is 
quite  wrong  in  maintaining  that  enlightened  egoism  and  self- 
interest  will  keep  the  people  living  together  in  peace  and  security. 
On  the  contrary,  each  will  desire  peace  so  long  as  it  is  beneficial 
for  him.  As  soon  as  a  man  perceives  that  it  is  unfavorable  to 
him,  he  will  destroy  it.  The  multitude  will  then  live  in  a  state 
of  perpetual  dissolution.  A  force  of  cohesion  is  here  indispens- 
able.    This  force  we  find  in  the  principle  of  justice. 

Justice,  as  we  have  mentioned  above,  is  a  power  of  our  soul 
which  makes  us  affirm  what  is  just,  independent  of  all  interests; 
makes  us  desire,  above  all  other  things,  the  pubHc  security;  and 
which  attaches  us  to  the  city  more  strongly  than  to  our  family 
or  to  what  relates  exclusively  to  our  egoism.*^  By  its  law  of 
equilibrium  and  its  formula  of  reciprocity,  it  could  establish  order 
and  create  unity,  in  a  word,  bring  all  variable  and  contradictory 
phenomena  to  a  general  and  constant  law.*^ 


82  What  is  Property,  pp.  221  and  223. 

83  Justice,  V,  pp.  60-61. 
s^Ibid:  I,  p.  142. 

85  Justice  I,  p.  146. 

86  "La  Guerre  .  .  ."  I,  pp.  146-149,  151,  153,  185-186. 

87  Justice  V,  p.  158. 


CHAPTER  IV 

Proudhon's  Theory  of  the  State  from  the  Standpoint  of 
AN  Anarchist — Descriptive 

There  are  two  Proudhons,  (1)  Proudhon  the  anarchist,  and 
(2)  Proudhon  the  federalist;  the  first  youthful  and  insurgent,  and 
the  second  mature  and  cautious.  For  a  superficial  reader,  it  is 
very  easy  to  confuse  the  one  with  the  other.  For  the  sake  of 
clearness,  we  may  divide  his  work  into  two  parts,  (1)  his  theory 
of  the  state  from  the  standpoint  of  an  anarchist  (1840-1861) 
and  (2)  his  theory  of  the  state  from  the  standpoint  of  a  federalist 
(1861-1865). 

Whether  anarchist  or  federalist,  Proudhon  holds  the  general 
nature  and  scope  of  political  science  to  be  the  same.  He  declares 
that  politics  is  one  branch  of  social  science,  a  division  of  anth- 
ropology, a  section  of  natural  history.^  It  must  be  exact,  mathe- 
matical and  positive.^  With  regard  to  its  scope,  it  includes  ad- 
ministration, legislation,  diplomacy,  war,  private  law,  public  law 
and  the  law  of  nations.^ 

Proudhon's  task  as  an  anarchist  is  twofold :  (1)  As  a  negative 
critic  of  the  old  political  institutions,  and  (2)  as  a  creative 
thinker  of  anarchism  or  republicanism.  His  doctrines  in  the  first 
capacity  will  be  considered  in  this  chapter. 

Between  1840  and  1861  Proudhon  had  two  main  ideas  in  his 
mind:  (a)  The  abolition  of  authority,  and  (b)  the  establishment 

^  Contradictions  Politiques,  p.  55. 

2  "Le  gouvcrnement  et  la  loi  doivent  decouler  d'une  science  exacte  et 
mathematique  qui  n'ait  plus  rien  de  personnel,  d'occasionncl,  de  circon- 
stanciel,  mais  qui,  absolue  dans  ses  principcs  et  ses  conclusions,  implique 
le  consentement  et  I'adhesion  de  tous  les  citoyens,"  Melange  I,  p.  168. 
See  also  Celebration  du  Dimanche,  pp.  133-183.  Avertissement,  p.  53. 
Bougie,  p.  56. 

3  Philosophic   du   Progres,   p.  69. 


Origin  of  the  State  65 

of  the  regime  of  justice.*  With  these  two  ideas  as  his  basic 
principle,  he  proceeded  to  formulate  his  theory  of  the  state,  both 
destructive  and  constructive.    He  commenced  with  its  very  origin. 

(1)   Origin  of  the  state. 

The  state  Is  the  last  of  four  stages  of  social  development : 
The  patriarchal  family,  the  tribe,  the  city,  and  the  state. 

(a)  In  the  patriarchal  family,  the  father,  or  the  elder,  is  the 
ruler. 

In  the  beginning  of  society,  all  men  are  equal.  Each  is  obliged 
to  do  his  own  work,  hunting,  fishing,  and  pasturing.^  According 
to  the  constitution  of  the  family,  the  father  naturally  finds  himself 
in  control  of  the  family  property  and  responsible  for  the  direction 
of  the  actions  of  the  family  group.^  In  other  words,  he  becomes 
the  chief  of  the  family.  All  the  other  members  have  to  follow 
him.  His  function  is  exclusively  that  of  a  reflective  and  intel- 
lectual nature.'^  Thus  Proudhon  agrees  with  Bonald  that  the 
family  is  the  embryo  of  the  state.  It  is  in  the  heart  of  the  family 
that  the  spirit  of  authority  has  its  root.®  But  the  conclusion  he 
draws  from  this  is  that  if  one  wishes  to  regenerate  it  through 
the  simplification  of  its  attributes  and  the  limitation  of  its  powers, 
he  is  confronted  with  the  necessity  of  cutting  away  all  the  bonds 
between  the  state  and  the  family.  The  reason  why  Proudhon 
reproaches  the  governmental  socialism  of  Louis  Blanc  is  just 
because  it  misapplies  to  society  the  principles  of  domestic 
economy.® 

(b)  In  the  tribe,  the  father  is  the  ruler. 

Two  or  more  families,  different  in  nature  and  in  purposes, 
each  formed  for  the  exercise  of  a  special  function  and  the 
creation    of   a   particular   product,    are    united    through   volun- 

*  What  is  Property,  p.  254.    Philosophic  du  Progres,  p.  48. 

5  Justice  VI,  p.  87. 

6  Ibid  II,  p.  108. 

7  What  is  Property,  p.  261. 

8  Idee  Generale,  p.  109. 
^Ibid:  pp.  108-109,  253. 


66  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

tary  or  involuntary  agreement. ^°  Thus  the  tribe  emerges  from 
the  family,  and  therewith,  to  conserve  his  dignity,  the  father 
increases  his  power  from  that  over  one  family  to  that  over 
several. ^^ 

(c)  In  the  city,  the  chief  of  the  strong  tribe  is  the  ruler. 
Gradually  weak  tribes  are  incorporated  with,  or  eliminated  by, 

the  strong.^^  As  a  result  of  this  process,  there  comes  into  exist- 
ence the  city.  It  is  a  natural  law  that  the  greater  force  will  absorb 
and  assimilate  the  smaller.  The  chief  of  the  strong  tribe,  there- 
fore, holds  under  his  control  more  children,  more  associates,  more 
slaves,  more  dependents,  more  animals,  more  land  and  more 
capital  than  the  others ;  in  short,  one  who  controls  the  greatest 
collective  power,  will  hold  the  chief  place  in  the  city.^^ 

(d)  In  the  state,  the  prince  is  the  ruler. 
In   close   connection   with   the   development   of   the   state   is 

the  development  of  force.  In  a  savage  society  only  brute  force 
prevails.  But  as  civilization  advances,  force  is  glorified,  hallowed 
and  refined.  To  the  idea  of  force  is  added  that  of  right.  The 
strongest  man  will  be  the  most  virtuous  man.  This  is  the  second 
period  in  the  development  of  force;  the  period  of  conflicts 
between  the  nobles  and  the  plebeians.  Against  the  anarchy  of 
these  two  conflicting  classes,  there  emerges  the  prince,  who  be- 
comes the  representative  of  the  sovereign  or  collective  force. 
His  judgment  is  the  law  over  the  combating  parties. ^^ 

(2)  Definition  of  state  and  government. 

Proudhon's  definition  of  state  is  fourfold.    First,  state  seems 
to  him  to  be  identical  with  nation  and  government. ^^     Second, 

10  Bougie,  p.  239.     "La  Guerre,"  I,  p.  172. 
"  Justice  II,  p.  108. 

12  La  Guerre  I,  p.  172. 

13  Justice  II,  p.  108. 
"La  Guerre  I,  pp.  108-109. 
Injustice  I,  p.  96.     "Nous  sommes  induits  necessairemcnt  a  croire  que 

ce    mot    Etat,    pouvoir,    gouvcrnement    indique   un    veritable   etre'."     "La 
Guerre"  I,  p.  183.     "Un  nation,  un  Etat,  est  un  personne  collective.  .  .  ." 


State  and  Government  Defined  67 

the  state  represents  the  collective  force  of  society,  produced  not 
by  the  relation  of  either  domination  or  subordination,  but  by 
the  spirit  of  reciprocity,  which  exists  among  the  citizens;  so  that 
to  affirm  the  state  is  to  affirm  the  public  power,  the  public  thing, 
rem  publicam,  and  fundamentally  to  deny  public  authority.^® 
Thirdly,  the  state  is  a  collective  person,  and  is  endowed,  like  an 
individual,  with  a  life  of  its  own,  which  has  its  liberty,  its 
character,  its  genius,  and  consequently  its  rights,  the  first  and 
the  most  essential  of  which  is  the  maintenance  of  its  originality, 
independence  and  autonomy.^^  The  form  of  the  state,  as  a  col- 
lective person,  constitutes  its  body  or  organism,  and  its  ideas 
constitute  its  conscience.  It  is,  therefore,  a  real  being  because 
it  has  the  main  attributes  of  existence,  form  and  idea,  body  and 
soul.^^  Fourthly,  the  state,  as  the  organ  of  the  collective  force 
and  the  incarnation  of  justice,  is  in  its  last  analysis  an  economic 
expression. ^^ 

As  mentioned  above,  Proudhon  seems  to  have  no  distinct 
notion  of  the  difference  between  state  and  government.  His 
definition  of  government  is,  therefore,  more  or  less  identical  with 
that  of  state.  First,  government  is  a  phenomenon  of  the  col- 
lective life,  the  external  representation  of  our  right,  the  education 
of  some  of  our  faculties. ^°  In  other  words,  it  is  a  real  being, 
having  the  organs  of  existence,  idea  and  form,  the  body  and  the 
soul  of  life.^^  Second,  government  is  the  manifestation  of  social 
spontaneity,  the  preparation  of  humanity  for  a  superior  state. 
Thirdly,  government  is  the  incarnation  of  liberty.  While  there 
is  no  liberty  there  is  no  government.  The  best  form  of  govern- 
ment, in  its  literal  sense,  is  a  contradictory  idea.  The  problem 
for  us  is  not  to  know  how  we  should  be  the  better  governed, 
but  how  we  should  be  the  most  nearly  free.  Liberty,  adequate 
and  identified  with  order,  is  what  we  wish.     How  to  establish 

"  Justice  V,  pp.  184-185. 
"  La  Guerre  I,  p.  183. 

18  Justice  II,  p.  96. 

19  "La  Guerre"  I,  p.  140. 

20  Melange  II,  pp.  260-266. 

21  Justice  II,  p.  96. 


68  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

liberty,  which  is  synonymous  with  order,  is  what  we  aim  at  in 
the  analysis  of  the  different  formulae  of  authority.  For  all  the 
rest,  we  admit  the  government  of  man  by  man  no  more  than  we 
do  the  exploitation  of  man  by  man.^' 

(3)   The  development  of  the  state. 

The  state,  as  previously  stated,  has  its  ideas  as  well  as  its 
forms.  In  discussing  its  development,  we  may  divide  our  work 
accordingly. 

(a)  There  were  three  stages  in  the  development  of  its  ideas: 
(x)  The  idea  of  pagan  antiquity  or  the  idea  of  necessity;  (y)  the 
idea  of  the  Christian  church,  or  the  idea  of  Providence  (these 
two  ideas,  antithetic  to  each  other,  being  the  opposites  of  an 
antinomy  which  runs  through  all  the  religious  age)  ;  and  (z)  the 
idea  of  revolution  or  of  justice,  which  constitutes,  in  opposition 
to  religious  government,  human  government. 

All  governments  which  have  as  their  basis  the  idea  of  fatalism 
or  that  of  Providence,  tend  to  disruption,  and  oscillate  from  one 
catastrophe  to  another.  The  problem  for  us,  then  is,  after  giving 
the  economic  background,-^  to  apply  the  idea  of  justice  to  gov- 
ernment, and  thus  free  it  from  the  idea  of  fatalism  and  of  arbi- 
trariness.   This  is  the  object  of  revolution.^* 

(x)  The  idea  of  necessity. 

The  idea  of  necessity,  in  other  words,  the  idea  of  political 
fatalism,  Proudhon  points  out  in  his  ironical  manner,  is  based 
upon  the  idea  of  natural  inequality.  In  society,  as  in  nature, 
according  to  the  fatalists,  the  faculties  of  individuals  and,  conse- 
quently, their  conditions,  are  unequal. ^^  In  such  a  situation 
justice  cannot  be  the  supreme  law.  It  will  be  subordinated  to 
a  higher  law,  the  organ  of  which  is  the  government.  This  higher 
law  is  the  necessity  of  inequality — inequality  of  nature,  inequality 

22  Melange  II,  p.  261. 

23  Sec  infra.  Chapter  VI. 
2*  Justice  II,  pp.  15-16. 
25/6id:  II,  p.  32. 


Development  of  the  State  69 

of  fortune,  inequality  in  society  and  inequality  before  the  law.^^ 
Inequality  is  a  necessity,  a  law  of  nature  and  of  Providence.  It 
is  inevitable.^^ 

The  inequality  of  conditions  engenders  a  divergence  of  in- 
terests, which  cannot  be  terminated  by  the  course  of  justice. 
Hence  the  government,  for  the  purpose  of  overcoming  any  resist- 
ance, is  armed  with  a  superior  prerogative  which  gives  it  the 
right  of  suppressing  justice  and  liberty.  This  is  the  basis  of 
the  "reason  of  state."    It  is  inevitable. 

But  this  prerogative  soon  appears  to  be  incompatible  with  the 
division  of  power.  It  demands,  then,  that  the  greatest  liberty 
should  be  left  to  the  prince ;  that  what  one  calls  the  constitution, 
the  object  of  which  is  to  limit  the  political  power  of  the  prince, 
should  be  destroyed ;  and  finally  that,  as  the  government  is,  above 
all,  a  force  of  will  and  of  action,  it  is  inseparable  from  the  person 
of  the  prince;  in  other  words,  the  prince  and  the  state  are 
identical,  one  and  the  same  thing.    This  is  still  inevitable. 

Then,  because  of  sovereign  action,  there  should  be  concentra- 
tion, incessant  absorption  of  the  faculties  of  the  nation  into  the 
faculties  of  the  prince.     This  is  also  inevitable. 

Hence,  three  consequences  inevitably  follow:  first,  the  cor- 
luption  of  the  social  body  by  the  governmental  instrument; 
second,  the  reaction  of  the  citizen  against  the  prince,  the  antag- 
onism between  society  and  the  government;  and  thirdly,  revolu- 
tion, change  of  policy  in  the  power  of  the  government,  if  not  the 
death  of  the  nation  and  of  the  state.     All  these  are  inevitable.^^ 

Then  Proudhon  points  out  that  the  falsity  of  this  theory  is 
threefold.  First,  it  is  false  metaphysically,  because  it  presupposes 
a  cause,  namely,  inequality,  and  consequently  a  condition  of  neces- 
sary antagonism  of  classes.  In  the  second  place,  it  is  false  in 
its  notion  of  inequality,  because  it  considers  inequality  as  a  social 
law,  a  natural  law,  and  even  a  righteous  law.  And  finally,  it 
is  false  in  the  conclusions  which  it  has  tried  to  deduce  from  the 


26  Justice,  II,  p.  24. 

27  76j-d;  II,  p.  21. 

28  Ibid:  II.  pp.  32-33. 


70  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

facts  observed.  On  one  hand  the  fatalists  hold  that  the  subject 
of  the  state  can  have  the  right  of  revolting  against  a  natural  and 
social  law  in  such  a  manner  as  to  weaken  the  stability  of  the 
government,  which  Proudhon  insists  is  wrong  in  theory.  And  on 
the  other  hand,  they  declare  the  state  to  be  eternally  unstable, 
as  eternally  as  inequality,  the  cause  of  its  instability,  is  eternal ; 
whereas,  in  truth,  the  state's  instability  is  only  transitory,  and 
so  far  from  being  eternal,  it  is  only  temporary.^^ 

The  inequality  of  conditions  which  is  recognized  by  the  fatal- 
ists as  the  cause  of  political  instability  of  the  state,  is  not  a  law, 
but  an  accident  of  nature.  Hence,  it  follows  that  the  instability 
of  the  state  is  not  anything  of  necessity.  It  is  rather  an  accident. 
In  addition  to  this  fact,  it  is  not  primarily  the  inequality  of  con- 
ditions, that  provokes  directly  the  revolt  against  the  government  ; 
it  is  the  political  iniquity  of  the  government  which  makes  the 
state  an  instrument  of  oppression  to  labor  and  to  liberty.^" 

With  the  false  idea  of  inequality  as  its  basis,  the  principle 
of  political  fatalism  has  entailed  many  evil  effects  upon  society. 
First,  from  the  theory  of  natural  inequality,  the  political  fatalists 
deduce  the  theory  of  social  inequality;  that  is,  the  necessity  of 
slavery,  the  distinction  of  castes,^^  and  the  suhordination  of  the 
masses  to  the  privileged  class. ^^  Second,  because  economic  in- 
equality is  to  be  maintained  by  force,  despotism  and  tyranny,  and 
the  economic  order  is  placed  outside  of  the  idea  of  right  by  the 
inequality  it  has  consecrated  and  developed,  the  political  order, 
instituted  for  its  defense,  must  also,  by  the  fatalists'  reasoning, 
be  dissociated  from  the  idea  of  right.  The  more  this  inequality 
prevails  among  the  citizens  and  causes  society  to  crumble  to 
pieces,  the  more  will  government  be  forced  to  use  its  power  to 
protect  the  privileges  of  the  old  economic  order.^^  Thirdly, 
political   inequality   is   closely    allied   with   economic   inequality. 


29  Justice  II,  p.  21. 
^ojhid:  II,  pp.  20-21. 
31/fet'd:  I,  pp.  64-65. 
32  76td.-  II,  p.  23. 
^^Ibid:  II,  p.  22. 


Development  of  the  State  71 

With  the  political  fatalists,  the  state  is  nothing  more  than  the 
inheritance  of  the  privileged  class.  What  is  useful  to  society, 
that  is  to  say,  to  the  hierarchy,  to  the  nobles,  to  the  clergy,  to 
the  prince,  is  the  real  good;  what  is  injurious  to  them  is  the  evil. 
Force  may  be  used  by  the  state  to  prevent  the  revolt  of  the 
commons  against  the  privileged.  But  no  justice  could  ever  exist 
under  these  conditions.^*  The  power  of  the  state  for  the 
privileged  class  is  unlimited.  Responsible  for  maintaining 
justice  on  the  one  hand,  and  inequality  on  the  other,  the  state 
can  do  no  wrong.  Its  will  will  predominate  over  all  the  other 
influences ;  its  prerogative  over  all  the  other  rights.  This  is  what 
the  political  fatalists  have  called  the  "reason  of  state."^^ 

The  substitute  for  the  principle  of  inequality,  or  the  remedy 
for  the  evil  of  political  instability,  according  to  Proudhon,  will 
be  found  in  the  principle  of  economic  equilibrium,  the  main- 
tenance of  balance  between  service  and  interests. ^^ 

(y)  The  idea  of  Providence. 

The  pagan  principle  of  necessity  is,  according  to  Proudhon, 
succeeded  by  its  opposite,  the  Christian  principle  of  Providence.^'' 
Under  the  pagan  principle,  humanity  is  doomed  in  advance; 
slavery,  tyranny,  the  distinction  of  castes,  the  antagonism  in,  and 
instability  of,  the  state,  and  finally,  the  stupid  belief  in  the  idea 
of  fate,  are  the  signs  of  the  doom.  Under  the  Christian  principle 
humanity  is,  on  the  contrary,  in  a  state  of  rehabilitation.  The 
world,  after  having  been  created  by  God  in  perfect  harmony, 
fell,  through  the  revolt  of  Satan  and  the  lapse  of  our  first  father, 
into  disorder,  in  which  the  inequality  of  conditions,  although  an 
accidental  fact,  prevailed.  Humanity  was  then  in  a  state  of 
penitence  when  Jesus  came  to  their  help  and  prepared  them  for 
rehabilitation.    In  the  end,  he  united  his  authority  with  his  church 

34  Justice  II,  23. 

35  Ibid:  pp.  64-65.     This  has  proved  to  be  the  chief  cause  of  political 
instability. 

^6  Justice  II,  pp.  20-21.     (See  also  below,  Chap.  VI.) 
^^Ibid:  p.  36. 


72  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 


and  created  in  this  church  two  powers,  one  spiritual  and  another 
temporal,  that  is,  the  priesthood  and  the  empire.^^ 

The  basic  idea  of  the  church  is,  first,  the  omnipotence  of  God. 
Humanity,  because  of  the  effect  of  original  sin,  is  in  a  state  of 
perdition.  Only  those  who  please  God  are  predestined  to  sal- 
vation. The  decree  of  predestination  is  foreign  to  all  merit  and 
demerit,  and  is  based  simply  on  blind  destiny.  It  is  equivalent 
to  a  true  lottery.  It  is  a  pure  act  of  the  good  pleasure  of  God. 
Thus,  in  a  Christian  government,  the  most  favored  are  not  neces- 
sarily those  who  are  the  most  deserving,  but  rather  those  whom 
the  religious  authority,  assisted  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  has  desig- 
nated.^^ The  Christians  depend  only  upon  Providence  for  favor, 
subsistence  and  success.'*" 

The  basic  idea  of  the  church,  in  the  second  place,  is  the  divine 
origin  of  government.  Society  is  founded  upon  the  idea  of  God.*^ 
All  power,  democratic  or  monarchical,  is  of  divine  right.  "The 
people  is  the  true  sovereign  immediately  established  by  God,"  said 
the  Abbe  Lenoir,  "and  universal  suffrage  is  the  means  through 
which  the  collective  mediator  makes  known  the  divine  will."*^ 

The  basic  idea  of  the  church,  in  the  third  place,  is  the  sub- 
ordination of  the  temporal  power  to  the  spiritual  power.  In  the 
state  of  Providence,  the  legislative  power,  having  as  its  principle 
theology  or  theodicy,  belongs  essentially  to  the  church.  The 
princes  and  the  kings  are  only  the  executors  of  its  canons ;  and 
the  pope,  servitor  of  the  servitors  of  God,  is  raised  above  all 
republics,  all  monarchies,  in  fact,  all  humanity.*^ 

The  basic  idea  of  the  church,  in  the  fourth  place,  is  the  idea 
of  authority.  Authority  to  a  Christian  is  the  same  thing  as  right 
to  a  revolutionist.  It  is  his  code.  It  is  his  charter.  "Cease 
speaking  to  me  of  political  rights,  parliamentary  forms  and  all 


38  Justice  II,  p.  65. 
^^'ibid:  p.  43. 
*o  Ibid:  p.  67. 
*^Ibid:  p.  43. 
42/&id;  p.  34. 
"  Ibid:  p.  43. 


Development  of  the  State  73 

your  constitutional  procedure,"  the  Christian  will  say.  "All  these 
are  atheistical.  I  am  a  Christian.  I  have  my  faith.  I  have  my 
Christ  who,  except  in  the  inevitable  accidents  which  are  chiefly 
due  to  the  imperfection  of  my  nature,  guarantees  to  me,  as  much 
as  I  could  desire,  the  wisdom  and  the  fealty  of  my  pastor."** 
Thus  in  the  church*^  as  well  as  in  government,  the  principle  of 
authority  predominates.  Just  as  the  government  of  Providence 
in  the  universe  is  a  government  of  reparation,  of  restoration,  of 
rehabilitation  and  of  predestination,  so  the  government  in  the 
Christian  state  is  a  government  of  dictatorship,  of  privileges,  of 
prerogatives,  of  expediency,  of  police  and  of  exceptions.** 

'  In  short,  under  the  government  of  Christianity,  authority  is 
everything;  political  justice  as  well  as  economic  justice  are  denied 
to  the  people.  The  principle  of  government,  in  the  order  of 
liberty  as  in  that  of  interests,  is  to  deny  right,  that  is  to  say,  to 
have  no  principle.*^ 

(z)  The  idea  of  justice. 

The  idea  of  Providence,  Proudhon  declares,  is  followed  his- 
torically by  the  idea  of  justice,  the  principle  of  revolution.  Theo- 
retically, justice,  in  order  to  be  effective,  should  be  more  than 
an  idea.  It  should  be  a  reality.  It  should  be  not  only  a  concept 
of  intellect,  an  economic  relation,  or  a  formula  of  order,  but 
also  a  power  of  the  soul,  form  of  the  will,  interior  energy  and 
social  instinct.  It  should  be,  in  short,  a  force,  not  simply  a 
notion ;  a  force  which,  in  increasing  for  the  individual  his  dignity, 
his  security  and  his  happiness,  will,  at  the  same  time,  protect 
social  order  for  him  against  the  incursion  of  egoism.*® 

Practically,  the  idea  of  justice  will  be  realized  through  the 
reciprocal  contract.  Two  men,  for  instance,  meet  together,  re- 
cognize the  dignity  of  each  other,  realize  the  benefit  to  both  of 
them  from  the  concert  of  their  industry,  and  in  consequence  they 

4*  Justice  II,  pp.  57-58. 
^5  Ibid:  pp.  46  and  48. 
^f^Ibid:  p.  66. 
^nbid:  pp.  57-58. 
*^Ibid:  I,  pp.  132-133. 


74  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

guarantee  each  other  their  equality.  Here  is  all  the  social  system ; 
an  equation  and  a  power  of  collectivity.  Two  families,  two 
cities,  two  provinces,  contract  with  each  other  upon  the  same 
basis.  There  should  be  only  two  things  resulting  from  this 
process — an  equation  and  a  power  of  collectivity.*^ 

In  sliori,  justice  is  a  pact  of  liberty. ''°  Its  practical  realization 
consists  of  the  estabUshment  of  a  social  order  upon  a  system  of 
free  adjustment  and  of  reciprocal  guarantees,  having  for  their 
inteipretation  the  arbitration  of  the  city,  and  for  their  sanction 
the  city's  power.^^  While  the  age  of  religion  has  been  the  age 
of  struggle,  in  which  the  heroism  of  combat  and  the  enthusiasm 
of  martyrdom  keep  the  place  of  happiness,  the  age  of  justice 
we  are  going  to  reach  will  be  an  age  of  science,  of  serenity,  in 
which  the  perfection  of  mankind  and  the  equilibrium  of  society 
will  be  achieved  through  justice.^^ 

So  far  we  have  considered  Proudhon's  general  idea  about 
justice.  We  may  ask,  then,  how  the  revolutionary  utopia^^  of 
justice  can  be  realized.  In  answering  this  question,  Proudhon 
has  his  faith  in  human  nature.  "It  is  the  law  of  nature,"  he  said, 
"that  the  intelligent  and  free  being  will  make  his  own  moral  rules, 
that  he  will  act  according  to  the  law  of  reason  and  of  liberty, 
and  finally  in  some  situations  that  he  will  find  himself  .  .  he 
will  achieve  fortune  through  his  morality.  Here  is  what  reason 
says  and  nature  demands — what  man  seeks  under  the  double 
and  irresistible  impulse  of  his  sensibility  and  of  his  conscience. 
To  remain  in  this  state  of  half  justice  is  impossible.  It  is  neces- 
sary to  advance.     .     .     ."^* 

If  justice  is  to  be  realized  Proudhon  is  not  blind  to  the  fact 
that  there  must  be  some  guarantees  for  it.  First,  it  must  be 
accompanied  by  the  equalizing  of  fortunes.    Justice  without  the 


*»  Justice  III,  pp.  114-115  (See  also  III,  p.  272). 

w)  Ibid:  p.  274. 

51/6/d;  I,  p.  124. 

52  Ibid:  III,  pp.  9,  71-72,  229. 

^^Ibid:  III,  p.  274. 

"  Ibid:  I,  p.  126. 


Development  of  the  State  75 

equality  of  fortunes  is  just  like  a  balance  with  a  false  weight.^'' 
It  must  also  be  maintained  by  force.  "The  obligation  of  observ- 
ing justice,"  said  Proudhon,  "is  subject  to  caprice,  to  immediate 
and  selfish  interests.  It  is  necessary  to  arrange  the  constraints 
against  another  constraint,  that  of  evil.  It  is  necesary  to  provide 
force  in  the  service  of  justice. "^^ 

(b)   Development   in   the   forms   of  government. 

There  are  two  kinds  of  government:  (1)  The  government 
of  the  old  epoch  and  (2)  the  government  of  the  new  epoch.  The 
government  of  the  old  epoch  may  be  classified  into  four  kinds: 
(a)  Monarchy;  (b)  aristocracy;  (c)  democracy;  and  (d)  mixed 
government.  When  government  belongs  to  one  alone,  it  is  called 
monarchy ;  to  a  few,  aristocracy ;  and  to  all,  democracy.  Besides 
these  three  forms,  there  is  still  a  fourth,  the  mixed  government, 
which  is  composed  of  the  elements  of  monarchy,  aristocracy  and 
democracy.^^ 

The  government  of  monarchy  may  again  be  divided  into  two 
kinds:  (x)  Absolute  monarchy  and  (y)  constitutional  monarchy. 
In  an  absolute  monarchy,  the  king  is  the  government;  the  people 
its  subjects.  In  a  constitutional  monarchy,  the  government  is 
composed  of  a  king  and  two  chambers,  the  members  of  which 
are  either  hereditary  nobles,  or  chosen  by  the  prince  or  by  one 
class  of  the  nation.  The  body  of  subjects  of  the  government  in 
a  constitutional  monarchy  are  those  who  remain  outside  of  the 
government,  that  is,  the  immense  majority  of  the  country.^^ 

Democracy  may  also  be  classified  into  three  kinds :  ( 1 )  The 
quasi-democratic  republic,  (2)  direct  government  in  its  moderate 
form,  and  (3)  direct  government  in  its  radical  form;  the  first 
being  the  form  in  actual  operation,  and  the  other  two  only 
forms  advocated  by  political  theorists.  In  a  quasi-democratic 
republic,  all  the  male  citizens  are  admitted,  every  third  or  fourth 
year,  to  elect  (1)  the  legislators  and  (2)  the  executives.     The 

55  What  is  Property,  p.  97. 

56  "La  Guerre  .  .  ."  I,  p.  291. 
"Justice  II,  p.  lis. 

58  Idee  Generale,  pp.  164-165. 


76  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

time  of  the  participation  of  the  whole  body  of  the  poeple  in  the 
government  is  short,  forty-eight  hours  or  thereabouts  for  each 
election.  It  is  because  of  this  fact  that  the  body  of  the  stribjects 
of  the  government  is  almost  the  same  as  that  in  a  constitutional 
monarchy,  that  is  to  say,  nearly  the  whole  body  of  the  people. 
\^  The  president  and  the  representatives,  once  elected,  are  masters 
in  the  state;  all  the  rest  have  to  obey.^^  In  a  direct  government 
of  the  moderate  form,  all  the  people  will  participate  in  at  least 
one  part  of  the  legislation  and  will  elect  one  part  of  the  agents 
or  functionaries  of  the  executive  power.  The  tendency  of  this 
system  is  to  make  at  least  one  half  of  the  people  plus  one  partici- 
pate in  the  government.'"'  And  finally,  in  a  direct  government 
of  the  extreme  form,  advocated  by  the  radicals,  all  the  people 
enter  into  the  government  and  take  up  all  the  powers  of  it, 
always  deliberating,  voting  and  acting  only  by  unanimous  consent, 
as  in  an  insurrection.  Under  direct  government  of  the  extreme 
form,  there  would  be  no  more  presidents,  no  more  representatives, 
no  more  commissioners,  no  more  majority  in  the  state.  All  the 
people  in  their  collectivity  are  legislators  and  administrators. 

Proudhon  in  1851  denounced  forcefully  this  extreme  form  of 
direct  government,  "If  all  are  the  governors,  where,"  he  asked, 
"should  be  the  governed,  the  judged,  the  administered?"^^  We 
may  notice  here  in  passing  that  what  Proudhon  thus  in  1851 
reproached  as  the  extreme  form  of  the  direct  government  is  just 
what  he  considered  as  his  ideal  form  of  anarchy  in  1843.®^ 

Historically  speaking,  the  three  main  forms  of  government, 
that  is,  monarchy,  aristocracy  and  democracy,  are  always  in  a 
state  of  revolution.  Just  as  all  despotic  government  resolves  it- 
self in  virtue  of  force  and  right  into  aristocracy,  so  aristocracy 
develops  finally  into  a  democracy.  Here  a  new  modification  of 
the  right  of  force  is  produced.    In  the  institution  of  nobility,  the 

s"  Idee  Generale,  p.  165. 
^Ibid:  p.  165. 
«i  Ibid:  p.  164. 

«2  Solution  du  Problcme  Social,  pp.  49,  87.     (See  also  below  Chapter 
VI.) 


Development  of  the  State  77 

right  of  force  is  combined  with  the  right  of  the  family,  that  is, 
the  right  of  birth.  With  the  advancement  of  democracy,  the 
right  of  birth  gives  place  to  the  right  of  numbers,  or  of  majority. 
The  force  of  collectivity  is,  then,  the  point  of  departure  and  the 
basis  of  the  social  contract.^^ 

The  different  forms  of  state,  from  absolute  monarchy  to 
representative  democracy,  are,  according  to  Proudhon,  but  middle 
terms,  illogical  and  unstable  positions  which  may  be  regarded 
as  steps  toward  liberty — a  political  ladder,  by  the  aid  of  which 
society  will  raise  itself  to  the  consciousness  and  possession  of 
itself.«* 

In  opposition  to  the  regime  of  the  old  epoch,  as  discussed 
above,  is  the  regime  of  the  new  epoch,  the  regime  af  anarchy, 
or  of  justice,  the  details  of  which  we  consider  in  a  following 
chapter. 


63  "La  Guerre,"  I,  p.  233. 
«*  Melange  I,  pp.  12-13. 


f 


CHAPTER  V 

Proudhon's  Theory  of  the  State  from  the  Standpoint  of 

AN  Anarchist — Critical. 

Proudhon  is,  essentially,  a  destructive  rather  than  a  con- 
structive thinker.  His  work  is  full  of  criticisms  of  the  state  in 
general  and  of  the  different  forms  of  government  in  particular. 

( 1 )   As  to  state  and  government  in  general. 

Proudhon's  attitude  toward  the  state  passed  through  two 
Stages.  From  1840  to  1850  his  criticism  was  always  bitter, 
and  sometimes  violent.  "What  is  the  state?"  he  asked.  "The 
state  is  the  army,  the  police,  the  judiciary,  the  public  treasury, 
the  budget,  the  custom  duty,  the  public  debt,  the  money,  the 
liquidation,  etc."^  It  is,  in  the  first  place,  distinct  from,  above, 
and  outside  of,  the  people.^  Being  originally  the  servitor  of  the 
people,  the  state,  by  general  and  unlimited  power  to  act  for  the 
electors,  creates  for  itself  an  interest  contrary  to  that  of  the 
people.^  It  is  in  the  second  place  a  parasite,*  acting  for  its  own 
interests.  It  has  to  create  many  public  functionaries  who  will 
gradually  form  an  official  class  over  against  liberty  and  labor. 
The  development  of  this  bureaucratic  class  will  result  in  nepotism 
and  corruption.  Seeing  that  the  imposts  are  not  sufficient  for 
its  corrupt  uses,  for  the  payment  of  its  favorites  or  sinecures, 
the  state  will  at  last  resort  to  loans,  or  even  to  embezzlement. 
After  having  taken  the  money  from  the  people,  it  will  invent 
some  means  to  make  them  applaud  its  robbery.^  Being  distinct 
from  the  people,  it  has,  in  the  third  place,  no  consciousness,  no 

1  Melange  II,  pp.  18-19. 
^Ibid:  III,  p.  76. 
3  Ibid:  III,  p.  76-78. 
*Ibid:  p.  76. 
Ubid:  III,  pp.  76-78. 


What  is  the  State?  79 

ideas  of  its  own.  Anarchy,  on  the  other  hand,  is  the  living 
society,  the  people  not  the  state,  who  have  the  consciousness  of 
their  ideas  and  who  will  govern  themselves  through  the  division 
of  labor,  and  the  special  delegation  of  functions — in  a  word, 
through  the  equal  distribution  of  powers.®  And  finally,  in  the 
fourth  place,  the  state  is  an  instrument  of  tyranny;^  having  as 
its  basis  the  physical,  intellectual  and  moral  indifference  of  the 
masses  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  permanence  of  antagonism 
between  the  weak  and  the  strong  on  the  other.  The  state  has 
always  endeavored  to  suppress  individual  initiative  by  its 
authority,®  and  the  revolt  of  the  weak  against  the  strong  by  its 
coercive  force.^ 

There  is,  therefore,  absolutely  nothing  to  the  state  except 
abuses  to  reform,  parasitism  to  suppress,  and  instruments  of 
tyranny  to  destroy.^"  Through  economic  revolution,  that  is, 
through  the  division  of  labor,  the  consolidating  of  industry,  the 
increasing  of  the  public  well-being,  the  distributing  and  equalizing 
of  capital  and  of  taxation — through  this  liberty  and  justice  will 
have  more  guarantees  than  religion  and  the  state  can  ever  offer.^^ 
In  a  well  organized  society  the  state  will  represent  nothing  more 
than  itself.     It  is  then  bound  to  disappear.^^ 

In  discussing  the  foregoing  criticism  of  the  state,  we  must 
not  fail  to  recognize  the  fact  that  what  Proudhon  attacks  is  not 
the  economic  state,  the  state  of  the  new  epoch,  but  the  parasitic 
state,  the  state  of  the  old  epoch.  As  early  as  1851  he  recognized 
that  the  state  did  have  some  real  functions  to  perform  when  he 
said  that  the  state  was  alone  capable  of  remedying  the  disorgani- 
zation of  society.  It  would,  for  instance,  destroy  the  effects  of 
monopoly,  and  of  stock-jobbing.^^     In  1858  his  attitude  toward 

6  Melange  III,  p.  76. 

7  Ibid:  II,  p.  19. 

8  Organization  du  credit,  pp.  91-92. 
^  Melange  II,  p.  23. 

^^Ibid:  II,  p.  19. 
^^Ibid:  II,  p.  23 
^2  Idee  Generale,  p.  91. 
Injustice   V,   pp.    184-185.     Proudhon    defines   authority   as    follows: 


8o  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

the  state  was  further  modified.  Instead  of  attacking  the  state 
as  tyrannical,  he  then  considered  it  as  being  the  embodiment  of 
pubUc  force.  It  was  not  the  state,  but  rather  government,  i.e., 
authority,  which  he  denied.  The  state,  as  conceived  by  him  then, 
is  the  most  energetic  agent  of  civiUzation.  It  is  indispensable  to 
society.  As  such  it  cannot  achieve  its  maximum  power  imless 
it  is  separated  from  all  forms  of  authority,  of  governmentaUsm, 
and  of  divine  right.^* 

While  admitting  the  function  of  government  in  the  develop- 
ment of  mankind^^  Proudhon  criticized  it  still  more  severely  than 
the  state.  "All  governments,"  he  said,  "have  fallen  one  after  the 
other,  not  only  because  they  are  retrograde,  but  also  because  they 
are  governments."^^  First,  government  is  the  representative  of 
class  interests.  While  claiming  to  have  established  order  in 
society,  it  divides  society  into  two  hostile  groups,  the  rich 
and  the  poor.^"  In  a  conflict  between  the  two,  it  is  always 
on  the  side  of  the  former  against  the  latter.  Instead  of  sustaining 
liberty  and  equality  among  all,  it  has  endeavored  to  destroy  them, 
by  virtue  of  its  natural  inclination  toward  the  privileged  class. 
Thus  the  history  of  government  is  the  martyrdom  of  the  pro- 
letariat.^* Second,  government  has  no  generosity,  no  noble  senti- 
ment, no  intelligence  at  all.^^     Whatever  the  number  of  persons 

"Cest  la  faculte  que  s'arroge  un  individu,  une  corporation  ou  une  caste, 
de  disposer  a  son  gre,  pour  une  fin  comme  de  lui  seul,  et  sans  garantie 
ni  responsabilite  de  son  part,  de  la  puissance  publique,  des  interets 
generaux,  c'est  a  dire  de  I'Etat  me  me,  et  jusqu  a  certain  point  des  fortunes, 
et  proprietes  particulieres,  le  tout  en  vertu  d'un  droit  pretendu  divin  ou 
de  conquete,  de  la  superiority  de  race,  ou  meme  d'une  delegation  du 
people.  Le  principe  d'autorite,  qui  a  fait  jusqu'  ici  le  veritable  apanage, 
non  pas  de  I'Etat  mais  du  personnel  governant,  nous  le  nions  et  le 
repoussons  comme  incompatible  avec  la  dignite  de  I'homme  et  du  citoyen, 
incompatible  avec  la  justice,  incompatible  avec  la  notion  meme  de  I'Etat." 

"  Justice  V,  p.  183-185. 

i5/6td;  II,  p.  6. 

18  Letter  to  his  friend,  August  10,  1850. 

17  Idee  Generale,  p.  298.    Solution  du  Probleme  Social,  p.  42. 

i«  Idee  Generale,  p.  Ill,  256.    Justice  V,  \BA;  II,  pp.  4  and  70. 

10  Letter  to  his  friend,  Nov.  15,  1840  (St.  Beuvc,  p.  246). 


The  Evils  of  Government  8i 

constituting  the  government,  be  it  five,  ten,  one  hundred,  or  one 
thousand,  it  is  always  the  domination  of  man  by  man,  the 
reign  of  the  personal  will  and  caprice  of  those  who  are  the  gov- 
ernment,^" which  is  the  fiction  that  violates  liberty,  and  the  brutal 
force  which  annihilates  justice.-^  Thirdly,  government  is  by 
nature  contra-revolutionary ;  oppressive  in  its  policies  and  corrupt 
in  its  administration.  It  can  never  be  revolutionary.  It  is  im- 
possible to  expect  government  to  ameliorate  the  condition  of  the 
unfortunate  class.^^ 

In  addition  to  these  facts  government,  according  to  Proudhon, 
has  also  contained  in  itself  the  following  evils:  (a)  The  con- 
secration of  the  principle  of  inequality  through  the  lack  of  bal- 
ance in  economic  adjustment,  (b)  the  appropriation  by  indi- 
viduals of  the  powers  pertaining  to  society,  (c)  the  establishment 
of  a  fictitious  power  in  place  of  the  real  power  of  society,  (d) 
the  abolition  of  justice  by  the  reason  of  state  (raison  d'Etat), 
(e)  the  direction  of  government  by  an  arbitrary  prince,  if  the 
government  is  monarchical,  and  in  all  other  forms  of  government 
by  intriguing  political  parties,  and  (f)  the  continual  tendency  to 
the  absorption  of  society  by  the  state.^^  Proudhon's  chief  aim 
is,  then,  to  annihilate  government  through  economic  reform:— 
that  is,  through  the  abolition  of  interest,  the  establishment  of  free 
credit,  and  the  suppression  of  the  existing  system  of  taxation, 
etc.2* 

(2)   As  to  the  different  forms  of  government. 

Before  discussing  Proudhon's  criticism  against  the  different 
forms  of  government,  we  may  first  consider  briefly  two  of  his 
basic  ideas:  (a)  his  theory  of  sovereignty  and  (b)  his  theory 
of  the  division  of  power. 

The  meaning  of  sovereignty,  according  to  Proudhon,  is  two- 
fold: (x)   Independence  of  the  state  in  relation  to  other  states, 

20  Qu'est  ce  que  la  propriete ;  premier  memoire,  p.  30. 

21  Idee  Generale.  p.  130. 

22  Cont.  Eco.  I,  p.  288.    Confession,  p.  22.    See  also  Idee  Generale  p.  111. 

23  Justice  II,  pp.  115-116.    See  also  Idee  Generale,  pp.  254-255. 

24  Melange  III,  p.  50. 


82  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

and  (y)  supremacy  of  the  state  in  relation  to  its  own  people. 
Proudhon  admitted  the  existence  of  sovereignty  in  the  first  sense 
of  the  word.  "Considered  in  its  political  unity,  the  nation,"  he 
said,  "is  sovereign.  Its  autonomy  knows  no  authority,  no 
tribunal."25 

With  regard  to  sovereignty  in  its  second  sense,  Proudhon's 
opinion  varies  with  different  forms  of  government.  It  is  un- 
questionably true  that,  in  a  monarchy,  the  king  is  the  sovereign.^^ 
It  is,  however,  quite  wrong  to  allege  that  sovereignty,  in  a 
democratic  government,  rests  with  the  people.  First,  the  sove- 
reignty of  the  people  does  not  exist  in  the  real  sense  of  the  word. 
In  principle,  the  people  are  sovereign.  But  nothing  previously 
has  shown  that  they  could  have  performed  any  act  of  sove- 
reignty.^^ The  sovereignty  of  the  people  exists  in  name  only. 
In  spite  of  the  principle  of  sovereignty,  the  delegates  of  the 
sovereign,  once  elected,  become  the  masters  of  the  sovereign.^'* 
Sovereignty,  then  is  transferred  from  the  people  to  a  few  of  the 
mandatories.  It  becomes  a  fiction  only.^^  Second,  sovereignty 
of  the  people  is  immoral.  If  the  people  are  subject  to  error,  what 
would  become  of  their  sovereignty?  Would  their  error  be  still 
respected  in  itself  as  the  truth?  Would  they  obey  what  they 
willed  although  they  know  that  they  have  deceived  themselves? 
In  this  case  ,the  people  are  beings  sovereignly  immoral  because 
they  think  of  the  evil,  actually  will  it,  and  themselves  bring  it 
about.^"  Thirdly,  the  sovereignty  of  the  people  is  an  image  of 
the  man-king^^  (homme-roi).  It  is  exercised  in  the  collective 
name  of  the  people.  It  is  one  and  indivisible.  Its  action  is 
essentially  unitary.  It  could  leave  nothing  outside  of  itself,  with- 
out contradicting  its  principle,  its  aim,  and  exposing  itself  to  ruin. 


25  "La  Guerre"  I,  p.  251   (See  also  p.  210). 

26  Cont.  Pol.— pp.  170-171. 

2''  Solution  du  Probleme  Social,  p.  46. 

28  Cont.  Pol,  p.  90. 

29  Melange  III,  p.  49. 

30  Solution  du  Probleme  Social,  pp.  42-44. 

31  Idee  Generale,  pp.  257-258. 


On  Popular  Sovereignty  83 

In  rendering  sovereignty  collective,  we  should  have  done  nothing 
more  than  create  rivalries,  oppositions  and  antagonisms  in  the 
state.'^^ 

In  discussing  the  criticisms  of  Proudhon  against  the  theory 
of  popular  sovereignty,  we  must  not  fail  to  notice  that  even 
though  he  denies  its  existence  in  fact,  he  does  not  go  so  far  as 
to  deny  its  existence  in  prmciple.  He  admits  that  the  people  are, 
theoretically,  sovereign. ^^  What  he  tries  to  do,  then,  is  not  to 
do  away  with  the  principle  of  popular  sovereignty,  but  to  trans- 
form it.  In  order  to  achieve  this  aim,  Proudhon  had  three  dis- 
tinct ideas  in  mind.  First,  universal  suffrage  must  be  reorganized 
in  such  a  way  as  to  render  the  sovereignty  of  the  people  more 
effective  and  real.^*  Second,  the  sovereignty  of  reason  must  be 
substituted  for  the  sovereignty  of  will.^^  And  finally  all  society, 
the  whole  of  the  people,  instead  of  one  class  of  the  people,  must 
constitute  the  sovereign.^® 

With  regard  to  the  division  of  power,  his  idea  showed  three 
phases:  (x)  Against  the  division  of  power  (1848-1849),  (y)  in 
favor  of  it  (1850-1863),  and  (z)  once  more  against  it  (1864- 
1865). 

In  1848  Proudhon  considered  that  thought,  will,  and  action 
in  government,  as  well  as  in  man,  ought  to  be  indivisibly  imited.^^ 
Authority  ought  to  be  one  and  impersonal.  The  functions  of 
government  ought  to  be  separated  on  the  one  hand  and  well  co- 
ordinated on  the  other.^^  The  division  of  power  is  the  eternal 
deception  of  liberty.  It  is  the  division  of  what  is  indivisible — 
the  will  of  the  sovereign.  The  strongest  support  of  despotism  is 
found  in  this  division  of  power  into  legislative,  executive,  and 
judicial  branches.    Through  such  a  division  liberty,  equality,  and 


32Cont.  Pol.,  pp.  133-134. 

22  Solution  du  Probleme   Social,  p.  46. 

34Cont.  Pol.  pp.  170-171. 

35  Premier  Memoire  sur  la  Propriete,  Ch.  V,  2e  partie. 

36  Justice  II,  p.  123. 

37  Melange  I,  p.  153. 

38  Ibid:  I,  p.  170. 


84  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J,  Proudhon 

responsibility  are  bound  to  perish.^^  What  Proudhon  now  tried 
to  do,  therefore,  was  to  remove  these  divisions  and  concentrate 
all  power  in  the  hands  of  the  national  assembly.  The  assembly 
would  exercise  the  executive,  as  well  as  the  legislative  power,  not 
by  delegation  to  some  ministers,  but  by  its  own  self  in  dividing 
the  work  among  its  committees,  each  of  which  would  nominate 
its  ministers  and  agents,  with  the  approval  of  the  assembly.*" 

In  1850,  however,  he  ceased  to  advocate  the  idea  of  con- 
centrating power  in  the  hands  of  the  assembly,  because  he  realized 
that  a  collective  being  like  the  assembly  would  always  tend  to 
oppose  moderation,  always  going  to  extremes.  Its  despotism 
might  become  one  hundred  times  worse  than  the  autocracy  of 
one  man.  If  we  are  to  divide  authority  it  would  be  advisable  to 
give  these  separated  powers  some  control  over  each  other.*^ 

In  1858,  he  developed  his  idea  one  step  further.  He  saw 
in  the  division  of  power  its  unity.  "The  division  of  power,"  he 
said,  "is  only  the  unity  of  power  considered  in  the  diversity  of 
groups  which  form  it.  If  the  observer  places  himself  in  the 
center  of  the  network  and  from  there  runs  over  the  series  of 
groups,  all  power  will  appear  to  him  divided.  But  if  he  looks 
at  the  result  of  these  forces  in  their  relationship  with  each  other, 
he  will  see  the  unity.*^ 

But  in  1864  Proudhon  returned  to  his  former  view  again. 
He  thought  that  the  separation  of  powers  would  destroy,  not 
only  the  unity  of  conquest,  which  was  nothing  more  than  the 
submission  of  the  weak  to  a  strong  and  independent  power,  but 
also  the  rational  unity  which  exercised  itself  within  a  proper 
limit  and  which  was  excluded  from  any  idea  of  partition.  In 
short,  not  only  imperial  centralization,  but  all  kinds  of  govern- 

39  Desjardin  II,  p.  221. 

•*"  Melange  I,  p.    168.     He  made  no  mention  of  what  would  become 
of  the  judicial  branch  of  government. 
*i  Desjardin  II,  p.  221. 

*2  Justice  II,  p.  121.  (See  also  p.  106.)  Proudhon  expressed  the  same 
idea  in  his  "Petit  Catechismc."     Desjardin  II.  p.  222. 


On  the  Forms  of  Government  85 

ment,  including  that  of  the  city,  would  become  impossible  if  the 
power  of  government  was  divided.*^ 

Keeping  these  two  basic  ideas  in  mind,  we  may  proceed  to 
discuss  his  criticism  against  the  different  forms  of  government. 
Proudhon  denounced  monarchy,  aristocracy,  as  well  as  democ- 
racy, because  they  all  imply  the  idea  of  governmentalism.  He  felt 
that  there  should  be  no  authority — no  government.** 

(a)  His  criticism  of  royalty,  or  absolute  monarchy. 

For  royalty,  or  absolute  monarchy,  he  had  absolutely  no  sym- 
pathy. First,  royalty  is  hierarchical,  personal,  local,  stationary, 
living  within  itself  and  for  itself.  Its  social  basis  is  the  caste. 
For  mediaeval  feudalism  of  land  ownership  it  substituted  the 
feudalism  of  commerce  and  industry.  It  is  the  enemy  of  progress 
and  of  mankind.  With  it,  universal  suffrage  is  simply  a  lottery.*^ 
Second,  it  is  vicious,  corrupt  and  extravagant.  Its  court  reeks 
of  wastefulness  and  moral  laxity.*^  Thirdly,  it  is  arbitrary.  The 
nation-king  who  cannot  exercise  his  sovereignty  himself,  is  ob- 
liged to  delegate  it  to  his  agents.  Be  these  agents  five,  ten,  one 
hundred  or  a  thousand,  of  what  consequence  is  the  number  and 
what  matters  the  name?  It  is  always  the  government  of  man, 
the  rule  of  will  and  caprice.*^  Fourthly,  it  is  illegitimate.  Equal- 
ity of  conditions  is  the  aim  of  society.  In  order  to  secure  this 
aim,  it  is  necessary  to  abolish  royalty.*^ 

(b)  His  criticism  of  representative  government. 

No  less  forceful  is  his  criticism  of  representative  govern- 
ment. First,  the  people  can  never  be  legitimately  represented. 
The  electoral  system  is  the  mechanism  of  falsehood.  An  assembly 
is  formed  by  the  caprice  of  the  lot.  What  relationship  exists 
between  the  assembly  and  the  individual?  What  guarantees  can 
the  assembly  offer  the  individual?     Why  should  the  individual 

43  Cont.  Pol.  p.  137. 

**  Idee  Generale,  p.  130. 

*5  Melange  I,  p.  141. 

*6  Idee  Generale,  p.   164. 

*7  What  is  Property,  p.  56. 

*8  Desjardin  I,  p.  33. 


86  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J,  Proudhon 

make  the  enormous  sacrifice  of  accepting  the  resolutions  of  the 
assembly  as  being  the  expression  of  his  will,  the  just  measure  of 
his  right?  And  again,  when  the  assembly,  after  the  debate  of 
which  the  individual  knows  nothing,  comes  to  impose  upon  him 
its  decision  as  law,  and  offers  to  him  this  law  at  the  point  of  the 
bayonet,  what  becomes  of  his  dignity  as  sovereign?*^ 

Second,  interests  ought  not  to,  and  cannot  be  represented. 
If  they  need  an  intermediary  to  represent  them  they  are  interests 
sacrificed.^"  In  this  connection  we  may  notice  that  the  representa- 
tion of  interests  is  different  from  the  harmonizing  of  interests. 
To  harmonize  interests  is  to  abolish  interests.  Canals,  after  the 
harmonization  of  interests,  will  be  free  of  tolls.  Whoever  advo- 
cates representative  government  advocates  the  harmony  of  in- 
terests. Whoever  advocates  the  harmony  of  interests,  advocates 
the  absence  of  government.^^  To  represent  interests  is,  on  the 
"other  hand,  to  reconstitute  authority.^^  The  representatives  of 
interests  will,  for  instance,  levy  tolls  upon  the  canals  rather  than 
keep  them  free,  because  they  have  other  interests  to  take  care  of 
besides  the  interests  of  the  people.^^  "Speak  no  more  of  liberty 
represented,  of  rights  and  interests  represented,"  said  Proudhon, 
"because  liberty  and  interests,  in  their  collectivity  as  well  as  in 
their  inter-relationship  cannot  be  represented.  The  representa- 
tive of  a  nation,  as  well  as  the  representative  of  a  family,  of 
property,  of  industry,  will  be  the  chief  and  the  master."^* 

Thirdly,  under  a  representative  government,  the  individual 
has  no  freedom.  He  is  not  free  when  he  receives  from  others 
his  wages,  his  work,  the  measure  of  his  right,  and  his  duty.  He 
is  free  neither  in  his  sovereignty,  nor  in  his  action  when  he  is 
constrained  to  have  others  draw  up  his  law  for  him.  He  is  not 
free  when  he  is  forced  to  elect  a  representative  to  govern  him, 
even  though  this  representative  is  the  most  devoted  of  servants."'^ 

*^  Idee  Generale,  p.  143. 

■""^  Revolution    Sociale,  p.    187. 

5i/6trf;  p.  183. 

52/6id:  p.  187. 

53/feid;  p.  186. 

54/&tW;  p.  187. 

55  Idee  Generale,  p.  216. 


Representative  Government  87 

There  are  three  kinds  of  representative  government:  The 
constitutional  monarchy,  the  quasi-democratic  repubHc  and  direct 
government  in  its  moderate  form.^®  Having  discussed  Proud- 
hon's  criticism  against  representative  government  in  general,  we 
may  now  consider  his  particular  criticisms  against  the  different 
forms  respectively. 

(x)   His  criticism  of  the  constitutional  monarchy. 

Proudhon  is  a  strong  enemy  of  monarchy.  He  denounces  the 
constitutional  monarchy  just  as  severely  as  the  absolute  mon- 
archy. First,  the  constitutional  monarchy  is  a  class  government. 
It  is  the  government  of  the  bourgeoisie.  It  is  a  government  based 
upon  the  aristocracy  of  talents  and  of  fortunes.  The  majority 
of  the  people  are  excluded  from  the  government.  They  are  ex- 
ploited by  the  bourgeoisie  whose  tyranny  is  followed  by  the 
misery  of  the  proletariat.^^  Second,  the  constitutional  monarchy 
is  contradictory  in  its  basic  principles.  Unity,  legality  and  order 
are  the  three  essential  elements  without  which  no  nation  can 
exist.  In  a  constitutional  monarchy  royal  authority  produces  the 
unity,  preponderant,  inviolable  and  hereditary.  What  produces 
legality  is  no  longer  the  royal  prerogative,  without  which  govern- 
ment would  develop  into  pure  despotism,  but  the  national  will, 
manifested  by  various  laws  anterior  to  the  monarchy,  or  at 
least  contemporary  with  it.  And  finally  what  produces  order  is 
a  'third  principle,  objective  and  materialistic,  the  hierarchy  or 
subordination  of  citizens,  that  is  to  say,  the  inequality  of  faculties 
and  fortunes  resulting  from  blind  destiny.  The  order,  thus 
produced,  is  called  now  feudalism,  now  aristocracy,  now  govern- 
ment of  the  middle  class,  or  equilibrium  of  powers,  etc. 

The  monarchical  constitution  then,  necessarily  implies  three 
conflicting  principles,  royal  power,  national  will,  and  hazard  of 
conditions  and  fortunes.  It  is  from  these  principles  that  con- 
stitutional monarchy  develops  the  three  elements,  unity,  legality 

56  Broadly  speaking,  all  government  except  anarchy  is  representative, 
Melange  III,  p.  74. 

57  Solution  du  Probleme  Social,  p.  61.     See  also  Idee  Generale,  p.  165. 


88  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

and  order.  As  the  principles  upon  which  the  constitution  rests, 
royal  authority,  national  authority  and  the  authority  of  hazard, 
are  essentially  antagonistic,  they  fall  into  the  state  of  perpetual 
conflict,  so  that  in  the  monarchy,  unity,  legality  and  order  form 
among  themselves  an  irreconcilable  contradiction.^^  The  con- 
stitution so  constituted  by  the  three  principles,  is  subject  to  viola- 
tion, interminable  laceration,  and  permanent  revolution  and  catas- 
trophe.^^ 

(y)  His  criticism  of  democracy.®" 

Still  more  forceful  is  Proudhon's  criticism  of  democracy. 
First,  democracy  is  class  government.  It  is  a  government  of 
the  proletariat  over  the  bourgeoisie,  under  which  the  latter  are 
exploited  by  the  former.  The  tyranny  of  the  proletariat  means 
the  ruin  of  the  bourgeoisie.''^ 

Second,  the  government  of  democracy  is  composed  of  medi- 
ocre men,  who  have  practically  very  little  talent  and  fortune.®^ 

Thirdly,  democracy  means  ostracism.  Under  the  electoral 
system,  a  deputy  is  elected  to  the  legislature  presumably  to  repre- 
sent all  the  ideas  and  interests  of  the  general  public.  In  point 
of  fact,  he  represents  only  one  idea  and  one  interest.  The 
legislature,  being  composed  of  these  deputies,  reaches  its  decisions 
by  the  half  plus  one  vote.  Thus  the  half  minus  one  vote  is  not 
represented  unless  it  be  done  in  spite  of  itself.  The  minority 
is  virtually  disfranchised,  except  when  chance  intervenes  on  its 
behalf.  Consequently,  it  is  found  that  of  all  the  varying  ideas 
and  interests  which  concern  and  agitate  the  general  public,  divid- 
ing the  citizens,  only  one  idea  and  only  one  interest  find  ex- 
pression in  the  legislature — that  idea  and  interest  which  is  repre- 
sented by  the  half  plus  one  vote.       All  the  rest  are  pitilessly 

58  Melange  II,  pp.  122-124. 

C9  Ibid:  II,  p.  127. 

60  Proudhon's  classification  of  the  form  of  the  government  was  still 
vague  in  1848.  By  democracy,  he  means  probably  the  direct  government 
in  its  moderate  form  as  mentioned  by  him  in  1851. 

6^  Solution  du  Probleme  Social,  p.  61. 

62  Ibid:  pp.  59-60. 


Criticisms  of  Democracy  89 

excluded.  To  be  more  exact,  one  may  say  that  the  problem  of 
democratic  government  consists  of  eliminating  through  the 
mechanism  of  suffrage,  claimed  to  be  universal,  all  the  ideas  and 
interests  of  the  half  minus  one  group,  the  minority,  and  declaring 
sovereign  the  majority,  the  half  plus  one  group,  and  giving  all 
care  and  all  attention  only  to  its  idea  and  its  interest.^^ 

Fourthly,  democracy  means  the  tyranny  of  the  majority — 
the  most  execrable  tyranny  of  all,  because  it  supports  itself 
neither  upon  the  authority  of  religion,  nor  upon  the  nobleness 
of  race,  nor  upon  the  distinction  of  talent  and  fortunes :  it  has 
its  basis  upon  number  and  its  mask  in  the  name  of  the  people." 
If  the  majority  has  by  hazard  voted  for  the  budget,  the  minority 
may  believe  that  it  also  has  voted  for  it.  In  consequence,  it  is 
obliged  to  pay  what  it  has  in  fact  voted  against  paying.''^ 

Fifthly,  democracy  is  expensive.  It  costs  more  than  monarchy. 
The  reason  for  this  is  two-fold.  On  the  one  hand,  the  tendency 
to  allow  the  totality  of  citizens  to  participate  continuously  in  the 
affairs  of  the  government  is  contrary  to  the  law  of  the  division 
of  labor ;  on  the  other  hand,  the  tendency  to  bring  into  the  state 
liberal  functions  which  the  monarchy  would  have  outside  of  the 
state,  is  contrary  to  the  law  for  the  reduction  of  cost.^^ 

Sixthly,  democracy  is  materialistic.  It  has  as  its  basis  uni- 
versal suffrage,  which  is  nothing  more  than  a  kind  of  atomism 
by  which  the  legislator,  unable  to  make  the  people  speak  in  a 
substantial  unity,  invites  them  to  express  their  opinions  by  the 
head,  just  as  the  Epicureans  express  thought,  will  and  intelligence 
by  the  combination  of  atoms.  The  surest  way  of  making  the 
people  lie  is  to  establish  universal  suffrage.^'^ 

Seventhly,  democracy  is  contradictory  in  its  principles.  On 
one  hand  it  lays  down  as  its  fundamental  basis  the  sovereignty 
of  the  people;  on  the  other,  it  accuses  the  people  of  being  in- 

6^  Solution,  pp.  54-55. 
^*Ibid:  p.  56. 
65  Ibid:  p.  56. 
66/feid;  pp.  76-87. 
^■i  Ibid:  p.  62. 


90  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

capable  of  governing  themselves  on  account  of  their  ignorance. 
A  democracy,  therefore,  treats  the  people  as  sovereign,  yet  con- 
siders them  so  ignorant  that  they  cannot  make  use  of  their 
sovereignty.  It  is  necessary  that  the  authority  should  belong  to 
some  one  vi^ho  will  exercise  it  in  the  name,  and  by  the  authority, 
of  all.«« 

And  finally,  democracy  is  the  idea  of  the  state  raised  to  the 
nth  power.®^  It  is  the  idea  of  aristocracy  in  disguise.''"  It  reigns 
by  the  distinction  of  castes  and  the  supremacy  of  the  state.''^ 

(z)   His  criticism  of  the  radical  form  of  direct  government. 

Under  direct  government,  as  advocated  by  the  radicals,  there 
will  be  no  more  hereditary  royalty,  no  more  presidency,  no  more 
delegation,  no  more  representation.  Proudhon's  argument  against 
it  is  twofold.  First,  it  is  illogical.  When  all  are  governors,  where 
would  be  the  governed  ?^^  Second,  it  will  become  tyrannical. 
It  will  be  the  "begetter  of  cesarism"  in  spite  of  our  posts,  our 
railways,  our  telegraphs,  etc.  It  will  precipitate  us  much  more 
quickly  into  imperial  tyranny.''^ 

(3)  As  to  the  institutions  of  the  state. 

Proudhon  is,  as  we  have  seen,  a  violent  opponent  of  the  state 
and  of  government.  It  is  quite  natural  that  he  raises  objection 
to  the  various  institutions  of  the  state.  The  police,'^'*  the  army,'^^ 
and  the  political  parties^*^  are  all  denounced  by  him.  But  the 
most  significant  of  all  are  his  arguments  against  law,  the  courts, 
the  imposts,  and  the  public  functionaries. 

(a)  His  criticism  of  law. 

Proudhon's  idea  about  law  underwent  two  stages  of  change: 
(x)    The    transformation    of    law    (1839-1849)    and    (y)    the 

6s  Solution,  p.  66. 

69/fcj'i:  p.  86. 

^oibid:  p.  47-49. 

''^Ibid:  p.  2. 

72/feiW;  p.  164-167. 

^3  Idee  Generale,  p.  113. 

^4  Idee  Revolutionnairc,  p.  91. 

'5  Melange  I,  p.  72.    See  also  Desjardin  II,  p.  225. 

78  Confessions,  p.  81. 


The  Law  and  the  Courts  91 

abolition  of  law  (1851-1865).  From  1839  to  1848,  the  chief  aim 
of  Proudhon  was  not  to  aboHsh  law,  but  to  transform  it.  Law 
is  not  the  expression  of  the  king's  exclusive  will,  nor  of  a  general 
will  of  the  people.  It  is  the  expression  of  fact.  In  other  words, 
it  is  the  natural  relation  of  things,  discovered  and  applied  by 
reason.'^" 

After  1849,  Proudhon  changed  his  idea,  however.  He  in- 
tended not  only  to  transform,  but  also  to  abolish,  law.  Law, 
according  to  him,  is  originally  imposed  upon  the  people.  It  is 
obeyed  through  fear  rather  than  through  love.'^  It  is  a  cob- 
web for  the  strong  and  the  powerful,  a  chain  for  the  small  and 
the  weak,  which  no  steel  could  sunder.'^^  It  is,  therefore,  neces- 
sary for  us  to  simplify  it.  "In  place  of  a  million  of  statutes,  one 
alone  is  sufficient,"  said  Proudhon,  "do  not  do  unto  others  that 
which  you  do  not  wish  them  to  do  to  you ;  but  do  unto  others  as 
you  would  be  done  by."  ^°  To  simplify  law  is,  in  fact,  to 
abolish  it. 

Here,  Proudhon  developed  his  idea  of  contract.  For  law 
he  would  substitute  the  contract.  How  will  this  contract  be 
drawn  up?  According  to  him,  the  citizens  should  gather  in  a 
solemn  convention  and  there  define  the  rights,  obligations  and 
attributes  of  each,  exchanging  guarantees  and  indorsing  sanc- 
tions. Justice,  thus  springing  from  liberty,  would  not  be  ven- 
geance but  rectification.®^ 

(b)   His  criticism  of  the  judiciary. 

With  regard  to  the  institution  of  the  judiciary  he  also  enter- 
tained two  contradictory  views.  In  1848  he  merely  endeavored 
to  simplify  the  organization  of  the  courts.  Instead  of  twenty 
tribunals,  two  would  be  sufficient — the  "tribunal  of  instance,"  and 


7^7  What  is  Property?  pp.  56-57.     Celebration   du  Dimanche,  pp.    144 
and  189. 

78  Melange  III,  73.     Idee  Generale,  p.  270. 

''^  Idee  Generale,  p.   138. 

80  Ibid:  p.  150. 

s^Ibid:  pp.  139  and  274. 


92  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

the  "tribunal  of  cassation."  The  abohtion  of  the  death  penahy 
was  also  opposed  by  him.^^ 

But  in  1851  he  urged  the  abolition  of  the  judiciary.  Man 
alone  has  the  right  of  judging  himself.  If  he  is  guilty  and  be- 
lieves that  expiation  is  good  for  him,  he  may  demand  punishment 
for  himself.  Justice  is  an  act,  essentially  voluntary,  of  the  con- 
science which  cannot  be  judged  or  absolved  except  by  itself. 
Society  may  have  the  right  of  defending  itself  and  revenging  any 
injury  done  it,  but  not  the  right  of  judging,  and  after  having 
judged,  punishing  any  individual.^^  The  reason  for  this  is  that, 
in  an  actual  social  state,  authority  is  not  the  result  of  con- 
tract, but  the  result  of  constraint.  To  judge  and  to  condemn  is 
not  to  carry  out  the  principle  of  justice,  but  to  usurp  its  form.®* 
When  the  majority  of  the  people  are  denied  any  property,  the 
proprietors,  or  capitalists,  are  the  masters  of  society.  They  are 
allied  with  the  government,  enjoying  its  protection  and  its  favor. 
They  are  the  natural  judges  of  the  proletariat.^^  What  makes 
the  code  is  not  justice,  but  vengeance,  most  unique  and  atrocious 
vengeance,  the  last  vestige  of  the  ancient  hatred  of  the  patrician 
class  against  the  servile  class.^^ 

For  this  actual  society  where  tyranny  of  one  class  over  an- 
other prevailed,  Proudhon  wished  to  substitute  a  new  society, 
based  upon  the  plan  of  reason,  founded  upon  equality  of  right 
among  all  its  members,  and  especially  upon  the  free  and  volun- 
tary adhesion  thereto  of  each  of  them.®^  All  the  people  would 
enter  into  a  contract  which  would  express  the  free  will  of  the 
social  individual.®^  There  would  be  no  more  courts.  The  idea 
of  rectification  instead  of  vengeance  would  be  the  guiding  prin- 
ciple in  any  conflict  among  the  people.  Suits  would  be  reduced 
to  a  mere  convocation  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  the  testimony 

82  Melange  I,  pp.  71-72. 

82  Idee  Generale,  pp.  75  and  271. 

8*/feid;  p.  173. 

85/6irf:  174,  273-274. 

86  Ibid:  p.  272. 

87 /fold;    p.    175. 

88 /foicf;    pp.    174  and  312. 


Theory  of  Taxation  93 

of  the  accuser  and  the  accused.  There  would  be  no  need  of  any 
other  intermediary  than  the  friends  to  whom  the  parties  come 
for  arbitration.^® 

(c)   His  criticism  of  imposts,  or  taxation. 

Proudhon's  idea  on  this  topic  underwent  two  stages  of 
of  development.  From  1840  to  1848  he  opposed  taxation.  First, 
taxation  is  imposed  upon  the  poor  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
army,  the  court,  the  school,  the  police  and  other  things  which 
are  supposed  to  be  established  for  the  interests  of  the  poor.®" 
Second,  taxation  is  unproductive.  Whenever  the  government 
makes  war,  loses  or  gains  a  battle,  changes  the  outfit  of  its  army, 
erects  a  monument,  digs  a  canal,  opens  a  road  or  builds  a  rail- 
way, it  borrows  money,  on  which  the  tax-payers  pay  interest ;  that 
is,  the  government,  without  adding  to  its  productive  capacity, 
increases  its  active  capital — in  a  word,  capitalizes  after  the  man- 
ner of  the  proprietor  whom  Proudhon  has  so  bitterly  attacked." 

In  1861,  he  changed  his  idea.  He  now  did  not  demand  the 
abolition  of  taxation,  as  he  had  demanded  in  1849,®-  but  instead 
demanded  its  reformation.  Taxation  is  an  exchange  between  the 
individual  and  the  state.  It  is  paid  by  the  people  to  the  state  in 
exchange  for  what  each  of  them  will  receive  from  it  in  public 
service.  What  the  state  gives  to  the  citizen  in  terms  of  service 
ought  to  be,  therefore,  the  exact  equivalent  of  what  it  has  de- 
manded from  them.®^ 

(d)   His  criticism  of  public  functionaries. 

To  Proudhon,  public  functionaries  are,  first  of  all,  unproduc- 
tive.®* They  are  simply  parasites.®^  In  humanity,  there  are  four 
divisions  of  work :  mining,  industry,  commerce,  and  agriculture.   A^ 

s^Ibid:  p.  275. 

90  Cont.  Eco.,  I,  p.  260. 

91  What  is  Property?  p.  210. 

92  Melanges  III,  p.  84  (see  also  p.  48). 

93  Theorie  de  I'impot,  pp.  39  and  47. 

94  Cont.  Eco.  I,  p.  260. 

95  Justice,  VI,  p.  675. 


94  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

Proudlion  would  put  aside  anything  which  does  not  bring  to 
the  market  some  effective  product  furnished  by  one  of  these  four 
industrial  categories.  The  functionaries  of  the  state  are  unpro- 
ductive because  their  services  do  not  fall  within  the  law  of  ex- 
change. It  is  necessary  then,  before  suppressing  the  state,  to  sub- 
ordinate to  industry  this  power  which  adds  neither  to  the  devel- 
opment of  wealth,  nor  to  the  perfection  of  social  order.^^ 

Public  functionaries  are,  in  the  second  place,  reactionary. 
They  are  the  enemies  of  justice  and  liberty .^^  They  destroy  the 
spirit  of  enterprise.  They  crowd  the  central  government  and 
cause  the  administrative  machine  to  absorb  all  the  individual 
and  local  life  at  the  expense  of  free  thought.  The  producers  who 
might,  since  the  declaration  of  right  and  the  establishment  of 
universal  suffrage,  be  the  masters  of  society,  appear  before  them 
no  more  than  a  mass  of  slaves.  So  long  as  public  functionaries 
exist,  good  institutions  will  be  misrepresented,  rights  paralyzed 
and  liberty  become  impotent.®^ 

^^  Cont.  Eco.  pp.  276  and  333.    See  also  Desjardin  II,  p.  224.  / 

97  Melange  III,  p.  78. 

98  Cont.  Eco.,  I,  p.  61.    Alelange  I,  p.  277.    Justice  VI.  pp.  275-276. 


CHAPTER  VI 

Proudhon's  Theory  of  the  State  from  the  Standpoint  of 

AN  Anarchist — Creative 

As  has  already  been  said,  Proudhon  was  the  father  of  anarch- 
ism.^ From  1840  to  1863,  he  repeatedly  declared  himself  an 
anarchist.^  In  discussing  his  theory  of  anarchy,  we  may,  for  the 
sake  of  clearness,  divide  the  work  into  three  parts:  (1)  why  he 
preferred  anarchy  to  the  other  forms  of  government,  (2)  how  it 
can  be  realized,  and  (3)  what  are  its  general  characteristics. 

I.  Why  Proudhon  preferred  anarchy  to  the  other  forms  of 
government. 

Society,  he  declares,  is  perpetually  progressive.^  Anarchy  is 
the  condition  of  existence  for  adult  society.  Hierarchy  is  the 
condition  of  existence  for  primitive  society.  There  is  an  inces- 
sant growth  in  human  society  from  hierarchy  to  anarchy.* 

There  are  two  chief  differences  between  anarchy  and  all  the 
other  forms  of  government.  First,  anarchy  is  the  rule  of  justice, 
while  all  the  other  governments  are  that  of  power.  In  the  fam- 
ily, where  authority  is  close  to  the  heart  of  man,  government  is 
based  upon  birth;  in  the  savage  and  barbaric  society,  upon  patri- 
archy, or  force;  in  a  sacerdotal  society,  upon  faith;  in  an  aristo- 
cratic society,  upon  primogeniture  or  caste;  in  the  system  of 
Rousseau,  upon  chance  or  number.    Birth,  force,  faith,  primogeni- 

1  Maurice  Lair,  in  "Annales  des  sciences  politiques,"  15  Sept.  1909, 
p.  588. 

2  What  is  Property,  p.  260  (1840).  Letter  of  Dec.  14,  1849.  "Con- 
fessions" ch.  IX  (1849).  Letter  of  March  7.  1851.  Idee  Generale,  p. 
109  (1851). 

3  Corresp.  V,  p.  249. 
*  Melange  II,  p.  9. 


96  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

ture,  chance  and  number  are  all  equally  unintelligible,  with  which 
we  cannot  reason  but  to  which  we  can  only  submit.  They  are 
not  principles  but  different  modes  through  which  the  investiture 
of  power  is  effected.^ 

Second,  in  anarchy,  public  action  will  be  exercised  by  all  the 
citizens  individually,  and  independently  of  each  other,  while  in  all 
the  other  forms  of  government  it  becomes  the  exclusive  practice 
of  a  selected  few,  that  is,  the  few  public  functionaries  elected  by 
the  people  for  this  end.  All  the  others  are  no  longer  associates 
of  these  public  functionaries,  but  their  subjects.  It  is  this  sys- 
tem which  has  been  in  vogue  up  to  the  present  and  which  is  called 
in  turn  theocracy,  monarchy  and  obligarchy: — all  these  designa- 
tions indicating  one  and  the  same  thing,  that  is,  the  state  of 
priests,  dynasties,  patricians  or  nobles.® 

II.  How  can  anarchy  be  realized. 

Anarchy  can  be  realized  through  (1)  revolution  of  ideas,^ 
(2)  revolution  of  education,^  (3)  economic  revolution,^  (4)  so- 
cial revolution,^"  and  (5)  political  revolution.^^ 

Before  discussing  these  topics,  we  may  first  consider  what 
Proudhon's  general  idea  of  revolution  was.  Revolution,  accord- 
ing to  him,  is  extraordinary  acceleration  of  movement  in  the 
continuous  progress  of  humanity.^-  It  must  first  be  legitimate 
and  must  proceed  directly  from  the  anterior  state.  Second,  it 
must  be  legal.  It  must  support  itself  upon  established  right. 
Thirdly  it  must  be  pacific.  It  must  be  capable  of  developing  it- 
self freely  on  one  hand  and  tolerating  the  existing  ideas  on  the 
other.^^     Fourthly,  it  must  be  accomplished  through  progressive 

5  Idee  Generale,  p.  142.  See  also  Chap.  V,  his  criticism  against  the 
government. 

6  Melange  III,  p.  74. 
^Corresp.  IV,  p.  179. 
8  Melange  I,  p.   115. 

» Ibid:  III,  p.  48. 
10  Justice  VI,  pp.  87-89. 
"Melange  III,  p.  48. 
12  Ibid:  II,  p.  19. 
13/fetd;  I,  p.  14.    Ibid:  II,  pp.  19  and  210. 


How  Can  Anarchy  be  Realized  97 

reform,  instead  of  through  violence.^*  Violence  is  useless  and 
contradictory ;  useless  because  social  problems  can  be  easily  solved 
by  pacific  means/^  contradictory  because  violence  is  an  appeal  to 
force,  to  arbitrariness/*'  Fifthly,  it  must  be  universal.  It  will  be 
ineffective  if  it  is  not  contagious.  In  other  w^ords,  it  will  fail  in 
France  if  it  is  not  rendered  universal  throughout  the  whole 
world.^^ 

(1)  Revolution  of  ideas. 

Revolution  is  a  French  name  for  the  new  idea.  There  is  a 
distinction  between  progress  and  revolution.  When  our  ideas  on 
any  subject,  material,  intellectual  or  social,  undergo  a  thorough 
change  because  of  new  observations,  we  call  that  movement  of  the 
mind  revolution.  If  the  ideas  are  simply  extended  or  modified, 
there  is  only  progress.  Thus  the  system  of  Ptolemy  was  a  step 
in  astronomical  progress,  that  of  Copernicus  was  a  revolution.^^ 
As  soon  as  the  idea  is  vulgarized,  or  popularized,  the  transforma- 
tion of  society  will  be  accomplished,  with  or  without  the  support 
of  government.-^^. 

(2)  Education. 

In  close  connection  with  the  revolution  of  ideas  is  education. 
Proudhon  strongly  attacked  the  old  system  of  education. 
"Schools  are  the  seminaries  of  the  aristocrats,"  he  said;  "It  is 
not  for  the  people  that  the  polytechnic  school,  the  normal  school, 
the  law  school,  and  the  school  of  Saint-Cyr  have  been  founded. 
It  is  mainly  for  maintaining  and  fortifying  the  distinction  of 
classes  between  the  bourgeoisie  and  the  proletariat  that  they  have 
come  into  existence."  ^^ 

^^Ibid:  II,  p.  122.    Justice  II,  p.  94.    Corresp.  II,  pp.  194-200. 

15  Ibid:  I,  p.  350. 

16  Corresp.  II,  pp.  199-200.  Proudhon  admitted,  however,  the  right  of 
legal  resistence.  "Resistance  legale,  c'est-a-dire  maintien,  defense  et 
conservation  de  la  constitution  et  des  droits  qu'elle  consacre."  Melange 
II,  p.  68. 

1^  Idee  Generale,  p.  297. 

18  Justice  I,  p.  67.    What  is  Property,  p.  55. 

19  Corresp.  IV,  p.  149.    See  also  Justice  I,  pp.  133-134. 

20  Idee  Generale,  p.  291. 


98  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

Proudhon,  therefore,  substituted  his  new  idea  for  the  old 
idea  of  education.  First,  education  must  be  secular.  It  must 
be  freed  from  ontological  and  religious  speculations.-^  Second, 
education  must  be  professional.  By  the  obligation  of  appren- 
ticeship, by  cooperation  with  all  the  parts  of  the  collective  work, 
the  division  of  labor  will  no  longer  be  a  cause  of  degradation  for 
the  working  men;  on  the  contrary  it  will  become  an  instrument 
of  education,  and  a  pledge  of  security  for  them.-^  To  separate 
education  from  apprenticeship,  and  what  is  more  detestable  still, 
to  distinguish  professional  education  from  the  real,  useful,  serious 
daily  exercise  of  the  profession,  is  to  reproduce  under  another 
form  the  separation  of  powers,  and  the  distinction  of  classes,  the 
two  most  energetic  instruments  of  governmental  tyranny  and  of 
subordination  of  the  workingmen.-^  Thirdly,  education  must  be 
democratic.  It  must  be  the  same  for  all  the  people.^^  Through 
the  democratization  of  education,  we  shall  arrive  at  a  stage  in 
which  intellectual  equality  may  be  approached,  if  not  completely 
realized. 

(3)   Economic  revolution. 

/Economic  anarchy  is  the  chief  cause  of  the  existence  of  gov- 
ernmental institutions.-^  If  economic  forces  are  well  organized, 
there  would  be  no  need  of  government.  In  the  place  of  the 
feudal,  military  or  governmental  regime,  we  should  establish  the 
industrial  regime.^^  How  will  the  economic  forces  be  organized? 
Proudhon's  answer  to  this  question  is  rather  complicated,  and 
sometimes  contradictory.  Broadly  speaking,  we  may  divide  his 
economic  reforms  into  three  classes:  (a)  industrial,  (b)  com- 
mercial and  (c)  agricultural. 


21  Justice  II,  p.  148. 

22  Idee  Generale,  p.  235. 
^3  Ibid:  p.  290. 

2*  Melange  I,  p.   115. 
25  Idee  Generale,  p.  297. 
28/fciV;  p.   115. 


How   Can   Anarchy   be   Realized 


99 


(a)   Industrial  reforms. 

Proudhon  knew  perfectly  well  that  the  progress  of  society 
might  be  measured  by  the  development  of  industry.-'^  First,  he 
urged  the  division  of  labor,28  the  equalizing  of  wages,-*^  the  com- 
plete subordination  of  capital  to  labor,  and  the  identification  of 
the  workers  with  the  capitalists.^"  Second,  he  urged  the  cen- 
tralization of  industry — centralization  of  the  industries  affecting 
natural  resources  (including  mining,  fishing,  hunting  and  gather- 
ing of  fruits),  centralization  of  manufacturing  industries,  cen- 
tralization of  commercial  industries,  centralization  of  agricultural 
industries  and  centralization  of  science,  literature  and  the  arts. 
The  organization  in  each  of  these  five  great  categories  should  be 
democratic.  Each  should  elect  its  own  minister  by  relative  or 
absolute  majority.  Each  should  form  its  own  central  administra- 
tion and  support  it  at  its  own  expense.^^  Thirdly,  he  urged  the 
organization  of  workingmen's  societies  (Conipagnies  ouvrieres). 
Since  a  great  number  of  workers  are  employed  in  the  industries, 
it  will  be  necessary  for  them  to  organize  into  different  societies. 
These  societies  will  be  the  real  basis  of  the  future  industrial  or- 
ganizations.    It  is  in  them  that  Proudhon  laid  his  hope  for  the 

2^  Creation  de  I'ordre,  p.  242. 

28  Melange  II,  p.  23. 

-9  Proudhon's  theory  of  wages  underwent  three  stages  of  change:  (1) 
equality  of  wages  for  all  the  workers  regardless  of  their  service  (1840), 
(2)  abolition  of  wages  (1851)  and  (3)  equal  wages  for  equal  service 
(1858).  In  1840  he  strongly  advocated  the  equalizing  of  wages.  "The 
limited  quantity  of  available  material  proves,"  he  said,  "the  necessity  of 
dividing  labor  among  the  whole  number  of  laborers.  The  capacity  given 
to  all  for  accomplishing  a  social  task — that  is,  an  equal  task — and  the 
impossibility  of  paying  one  laborer  save  in  the  products  of  another, 
justify  the  equalizing  of  wages."  (What  is  Property?  p.  137.)  In  1851, 
he  urged  the  abolition  of  wages  (Idee  Generale,  p.  297).  He  changed 
his  idea  again  in  1858,  and  did  not  favor  the  equalizing  of  wages  among 
all  the  workers  because  he  believed  that  their  services  might  not  be 
equal.  He  advocated  the  determination  of  one's  wages  by  what  he  pro- 
duced.    (Justice  II,  p.  385.) 

30  Melange  III,  p.  48. 

^-^Ibid:  I,  p.  71.     Desjardin  I,  pp.  107-108. 


lOO  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

future  of  the  workingman.^-  Fourthly,  he  beHeved  that  each  of 
these  workingmen's  societies  should  be  autonomous.  Each  house- 
hold, each  workshop,  each  corporation  should  have  its  proper 
police,  and  should  administer  with  exactitude  its  own  affairs.^^ 
In  other  words,  all  the  affairs  of  police,  justice  and  administration 
would  be  managed  by  the  workers.^^  Industrial  organization 
would  take  the  place  of  political  government.^'^ 

(b)  Commercial  reforms. 

There  are  two  schools  of  socialism;  one  based  on  the  theory 
of  production  and  the  other  on  that  of  exchange.  For  the  former 
the  technique  of  production  is  the  basis  of  society;  in  order  to 
reform  society,  it  is  necessary  for  us  to  reform  the  technique  of 
production.  For  the  latter,  the  technique  of  exchange,  instead 
of  production,  is  the  economic  basis  of  society ;  in  order  to  trans- 
form society,  it  is  necessary  to  reform  the  technique  of  exchange. 
Proudhon  belongs  to  the  second  school.  He  believes  that  the 
social  problem  is,  fundamentally,  a  problem  of  correlation  of 
credit  and  exchange.^'^  He  believes  that  the  transformation  of 
the  mechanism  of  exchange  would  bring  about  the  reformation 
of  society.  His  plan  for  the  reform  of  exchange  is  two-fold — 
(x)  the  abolition  of  interest  and  (y)  the  abolition  of  money. 

(x)   The  abolition  of  interest. 

In  exchange,  the  basis  of  all  value  should  be  labor.^^  The 
price  of  the  product  should  be  made  in  terms  of  its  real  value, 
that  is,  the  net  expense  incurred  in  the  process  of  production. 
In  this  way,  all  the  intermediary  parasites  will  disappear.  The 
banker  will  get  from  his  creditors  a  remuneration  corresponding 
to  the  cost  of  services  which  he  has  rendered  to  them,  and  noth- 
ing more.  Such  will  be  the  case  with  the  money-lender,  the  land- 
owner, and  in  general  with  all  those  who  render  services  to  other 

32  Idee  Generale,  p.  232. 

83/6id;  p.  289. 

^*Ibid:  p.  297. 

^^  Ibid:  p.  259.    Confessions,  p.  33.    See  also  Desjardin  I,  p.  176. 

86  Bougie,  p.  173. 

37  Cont.  Eco.,  I,  pp.  92  and  97. 


How  Can  Anarchy  be  Realized  ioi 

people.  They  will  violate  the  law  of  reciprocity  if  they  exact 
any  excessive  remuneration,  passing  beyond  the  cost  which  the 
rendition  of  the  service  may  entail.  In  short,  all  the  forms  of 
usury  should  be  abolished.  There  would  be  no  discount  for  the 
money-lenders,  no  rent  for  the  landlords,  no  interest  or  dividend 
for  the  stockholders.^^ 

(y)  The  abolition  of  money. 

In  substitution  for  the  old  system  of  exchange,  Proudhon  is  in 
favor  of  instituting  a  new  system  of  exchange  in  which  reciproc- 
ity and  justice  would  be  the  guiding  principles.^^  The  interme- 
diary of  money  would  be  abolished.  We  should  use  banknotes 
only.  The  buyer  of  a  product,  instead  of  paying  his  creditor 
in  cash  would  meet  his  debt  by  a  letter  of  exchange  which  the 
seller  would  immediately  take  to  the  bank.  The  bank  would  give 
him,  in  exchange  for  his  letter,  a  bank-note  in  value  equal  to  the 
amount  inscribed  upon  the  letter.  With  the  bank-note  the  seller 
could  then  obtain  such  merchandise  as  he  needed.  Having  in  his 
hand  a  legal  promise,  redeemable  at  sight,  he  finds  himself  losing 
nothing  by  the  suppression  of  money.  The  bank  in  all  these 
operations  would  not  run  any  risks,  because  the  social  paper 
{papier  social)  or  the  letter  of  exchange  that  he  obtained  from 
the  seller,  is  secured  by  commodities.^" 

(c)  Agricultural  reforms. 

In  applying  the  principle  of  contractual  justice,  the  small 
farmers  would,  by  the  payment  of  rent,  gradually  gain  a  right 
to  a  part  of  the  property.  Through  the  development  of  this 
process,  the  great  land-owners  would  tend  to  disappear  and  the 

38  Melange  I,  pp.  60-62  (See  also  Melange  II,  p.  41-42). 

39  Solution  du  Probleme  social,  p.  93. 

*o  L'organization  du  credit  et  de  la  circulation,  pp.  111-131.  Proudhon's 
theory  of  money,  and  credit  may  be  found  in  the  sixth  volume  of  his 
complete  works  and  in  the  second  volume  of  his  "Economic  Contradic- 
tions." For  a  brief  view  of  his  idea,  see  Marc  Aucuy  "Les  Systemes 
Socialistes  d'echange,"  Paris,  1908,  p.  137.  Pareto  "Systemes  Socialistes," 
II,  pp.  267-280.  Osgood  "Scientific  Anarchism,"  pp.  13-18.  Miilberger, 
"P.  J.  Proudhon"  pp.  87-88,  104-117,  129-138. 


c     c      ♦     ■, "»     c       t 
«        <■  e      (        f        r  r 


102  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

small  farmers  would  become  directly  and  without  any  interme- 
diary, the  proprietors  of  the  land  they  cultivated.  Proudhon  con- 
sidered this  system  preferable  to  the  social  project  of  nationali- 
zation or  communizing  of  the  soil,  because  it  would  fundamentally 
satisfy  the  desire  " proprietiste"  of  the  peasant."  In  the  organ- 
ized republic,  agriculture,  formerly  the  work  of  the  slave,  would 
become  the  first  of  the  fine  arts  for  the  people.  They  would  pass 
their  lives  in  innocence,  free  from  all  seductions  of  the  ideal. ^^ 

The  result  of  the  economic  revolution  would  be  two-fold:  (1) 
social  and  (2)  political.  Socially,  there  would  be  no  strong  and 
weak  in  the  state.  There  would  be  no  capitalists,  but  all  pro- 
ducers.*^ Politically,  the  economic  revolution  would  end  in  the 
disappearance  of  government  within  and  the  growth  of  interna- 
tional peace  without.  Within  the  state,  the  governmental  sys- 
tem would  tend  to  merge  into  the  economic  system.^'*  The  in- 
dustrial regime  would  be  substituted  for  the  military  or  govern- 
mental regime.*^  There  would  be  no  courts,  no  law,  no  police."*^ 
Between  the  states  all  the  agricultural,  financial  and  industrial 
interests  would  become  identical  and  solidified.  The  commer- 
cial market  would  be  open  to  all.  Its  advantages  would  be  the 
same  for  all  the  nations.  There  would  be  no  need  of  diplomatic 
officers,  nor  national  distinctions.  The  producers  and  consumers 
of  the  world  would  be  merged  into  one  another.*''^ 

(4)    Social  revolution. 

Historically  speaking,  Proudhon  asserts,  society  has  undergone 
three  stages  of  development.  The  first  period  was  that  of  equal- 
ity. All  men  were  equal,  socially  as  well  as  economically.  They 
were  all  producers. 


*^  Idee  Generale,  pp.  217-226. 

•12  Justice  II,  p.   133. 

"  Melange  II,  p.  18.    Melange  III,  p.  48. 

**  Idee  Generale,  p.  196. 

^^Ibid:  p,  297-298. 

*8  Cont.  Eco.  I,  p.  208.     See  also  Corresp.  V,  p.  66. 

*7  Idee  Generale,  pp.  297-298,  301-302. 


I 


The  Social  Revolution  103 

The  second  period  was  that  of  military  conquest.  As  the 
result  of  war,  those  who  were  taken  prisoners  became  the  slaves 
of  the  conqueror.  Society  was  then  divided  into  two  classes:  (1) 
the  privileged  class  composed  of  the  priests  and  nobles,  especially 
devoted  to  the  altar  and  to  the  vocation  of  war,  and  (2)  the 
slaves,  servitors  or  serfs,  charged  with  the  care  of  the  household, 
the  providing  of  food,  and  the  performing  of  those  services  which 
concern  industry  and  production.  The  distinction  between  the 
privileged  class  and  the  slaves  was  based  upon  a  double  prejudice 
— cult  and  war.  If  we  should  abolish  war  and  religion,  we  would 
abolish  the  distinction  between  these  two  classes. 

The  third  period  was  that  of  economic  exploitation,  in  which 
the  bourgeoisie  class  was  formed  between  the  privileged  class  and 
the  servile  class.  There  grew  up,  consequently,  a  distinction  in 
industry  analogous  to  that  of  master  and  slave :  on  the  one  hand, 
we  see  the  capitalists,  proprietors,  entrepreneurs,  or  bourgeoisie; 
on  the  other,  we  see  the  laborers  or  proletariat.  While  grad- 
ually ameliorating  their  economic  conditions,  the  former  serfs  be- 
came merged  into  the  laborers  and  formed  a  new  class  which  we 
call  by  the  generic  name  of  plebeians.  Notice,  then,  that  the  dis- 
tinction between  the  bourgeoisie  and  the  plebeian  is  no  more 
rational  and  legitimate  than  the  distinction  between  the  master 
and  the  slave.  It  is  based  upon  the  no  less  arbitrary  separation 
of  labor  and  capital.^^ 

The  bourgeoisie  may  again  be  divided  into  three  subdivisions : 

(1)  those  who  live  on  the  rent  of  their  land  and  houses,  on  the 
interest  of  their  capital  and  on  the  profits  of  their  enterprises, 

(2)  the  small  manufacturers,  artisans,  shopkeepers  and  farmers, 
and  (3)  the  laborers,  or  employees  whose  income  surpasses  in 
some  degree  the  average  income  of  the  people.'*^  The  first  sub- 
division constitutes  the  capitaHstic  bourgeoisie;  the  second  and 
the  third  the  "pciite  bourgeoisie,"  or  the  "classe  moyenne."  ^°  In 
another  place  we  find  that  Proudhon  divided  French  society  into 

48  Justice  VI,  pp.  87-89. 

49  Justice  II,  pp.  6  and  159. 

50  Capacite,  p.  178. 


104  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

three  classes  instead  of  two:  (1)  the  bourgeoisie,  (2)  the  middle 
class,  and  (3)  the  proletariat.^^ 

His  attitude  toward  these  three  classes  was  inconsistent. 
In  1848-1849,  he  thought  that  the  economic  problem  would  be 
solved  through  the  combined  effort  of  the  bourgeoisie  and  the 
proletariat.^^  Later  on  in  1851,  he  appealed  especially  to  the 
bourgeoisie  for  the  accomplishment  of  the  revolution.  Though 
the  workingmen  may  be  capable  of  realizing  social  readjustment 
and  the  reconstitution  of  property,  they  are  incapable  of  manag- 
ing great  interests  such  as  those  of  industry  and  commerce.^^  The 
bourgeoisie  are,  on  the  contrary,  the  most  intrepid,  the  most  skil- 
ful of  revolutionaries.^*  It  is  upon  the  bourgeoisie  alone  that 
Proudhon  laid  his  hope  of  the  revolution.  "The  revolution  holds 
its  arms  to  you,"  said  Proudhon;  "save  the  people,  save  yourselves 
as  your  fathers  have  done  by  revolution."  ^^ 

In  1852,  however,  he  changed  his  mind.  Not  in  the  capitalis- 
tic bourgeoisie,  but  in  the  middle  class,  he  saw  the  hope  of  the 
nation.  The  bourgeoisie  who  have  endeavored  to  perpetually 
maintain  the  antiquated  relation  of  labor  and  capital,  deserve 
the  criticism  hitherto  addressed  to  them.  They  are  destined  to 
disappear,  for  they  have  no  plausible  excuse  for  existence.  The 
middle  class,  in  whose  bosom  lives  and  moves  the  spirit  of  liberty, 
holds  the  hope  of  the  future.  Even  though  it  is  oppressed  by  the 
bourgeoisie  insolence  from  above,  and  the  proletarian  jealousy 
from  below,  the  middle  class  will  nevertheless  form  the  heart  and 
the  brain  of  the  nation. "^^ 

As  for  the  plebeians,  or  the  workingmen,  Proudhon  generally 
entertained  a  very  low  opinion  of  them  between  1840  and  1858.°^ 
First,  the  plebeians  represented  two  of  the  lowest  elements  of 
society:     (1)  the  former  slaves,  and  (2)  the  degenerated  men  of 

51  Revolution  Social,  p.  135.    See  also  Manuel  du  Speculateur,  p.  450. 

52  Melange  III,  p.  161. 

53  Idee  Generale,  p.  235. 
"/6id:  p.  1. 

55/6iJ;  p.  3  (See  also  Melange  III,  pp.  124,  161). 

56  Revolution   Sociale,   p.  233. 

57  Justice  VI,  pp.  86-125. 


The  Social  Revolution  105 

the  superior  class.  From  the  slaves,  they  derived  a  strain  of 
cruelty  or  savagery.  From  the  degenerate  bourgeois  among  them, 
they  have  in  their  midst  the  element  of  baseness  and  of  corrup- 
tion.^^ Second,  the  plebeians  are  pitilessly  ignorant.  They  are 
incapable  of  seeing  further  than  their  noses.  They  lack  the  spirit 
of  originality,  of  initiative,  and  of  revolt.  What  they  want  is  the 
increase  of  their  wages,  the  reduction  of  their  working  hours,  and 
the  diminution  of  the  price  of  bread  and  rent.^^ 

Having  considered  briefly  the  nature  of  the  three  social  classes, 
we  come  now  to  the  question  of  how  Froudhon  was  going  to 
transform  society.  He  strongly  opposed  the  idea  of  class  war. 
He  claimed  that  his  work  was  a  plan  of  general  conciliation,  a 
project  for  the  treaty  of  peace  between  the  different  classes.®" 
He  declared  emphatically,  "There  is  no  greater  crime  in  my  eyes 
than  the  excitation  to  civil  war."  ®^  Instead  of  an  armed  conflict 
of  hostile  classes,  Froudhon  would  effect  the  abolition  of  economic 
classes.  As  mentioned  above,  his  distinction  between  the  bour- 
geoisie and  the  proletariat  is  based  upon  the  distinction  between 
labor  and  capital.  If  we  abolish  the  distinction  between  labor 
and  capital  we  also  do  away  with  the  distinction  between  the 
bourgeoisie  and  the  proletariat.  There  would  then  be  no  more 
capitalists  and  laborers;  all  would  be  producers,®^  all  would  be 
members  of  the  middle  class.®^ 

(5)   Folitical  Revolution.®* 

Folitical  revolution  is  closely  connected  with  economic  revo- 
lution.   The  chief  poUtical  reforms  proposed  by  Froudhon  were 

58  Justice,  VI,  p.  90. 

5^  Ibid:  II,  p.  13.  Ibid.,  Ill,  pp.  8,  160.  Ibid.,  VI,  pp.  91,  98.  Corresp. 
V,  pp.  57-58. 

60  Justice  Poursuivie,  p.  244. 

61  Corresp.  VI,  p.  381.  See  also  Idee  Generale,  p.  181.  Manuel  du 
Speculateur,  p.  479.  (For  a  general  view  about  his  philosophical  theory 
of  equilibrium  vs.  antagonism,  see  Melange  II,  p.  74  and  Melange  III, 
p.  16.) 

62  Justice  VI,  p.  89.    Melange  II,  p.  138  (see  also  p.  74). 

63  Revolution  Social,  p.  135.     Manuel  du  Speculateur,  p.  450. 

64  It  must  be  legal  and  pacific  (Melange  II,  p.  125). 


io6  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

(a)  the  substitution  of  the  industrial  regime  for  the  poHtical 
regime;  (b)  the  substitution  of  free  contract  for  law;  and  (c) 
the  organization  of  universal  suffrage. 

(a)  We  have  discussed  the  first  question  in  connection  with 
the  problem  of  economic  revolution.^^  We  may  now  consider  the 
second  and  third  questions. 

(b)  The  substitution  of  free  contract  for  law. 

Before  discussing  Proudhon's  theory  of  contract,  a  little  atten- 
tion given  to  his  criticism  of  Rousseau's  theory  of  social  contract, 
would  probably  not  be  amiss. 

First,  the  basic  idea  of  Rousseau's  contract  as  understood  by 
Proudhon  is  individualistic.  According  to  Rousseau,  the  individ- 
ual by  himself  is  good.  But  he  is  depraved  by  society.  It  is, 
therefore,  desirable  for  him  to  abstain  as  much  as  possible  from 
all  relations  with  his  fellow  men.  While  thus  remaining  in  his 
systematic  isolation,  all  that  he  has  to  do  is  to  form  between  him 
and  his  fellows  a  mutual  agreement  for  the  mutual  protection 
of  their  persons  and  properties.^^  This,  and  tliis  alone,  is  the  aim 
of  Rousseau's  contract. 

Second,  Rousseau's  theory  is  political  instead  of  economic. 
He  does  not  know  economic  principles.  He  neglects  the  funda- 
mental elements  of  contract,  and  occupies  himself  with  its  secon- 
dary questions  only.  He  thinks  that  he  will  gain  all  if  he  has 
established,  by  the  simultaneous  abdication  of  liberty,  a  power 
before  which  all  will  yield.  As  to  work,  exchange,  the  value  and 
price  of  product,  the  mode  of  acquisition  and  transition  of  prop- 
erty, and  a  series  of  important  economic  questions,  Rousseau  has 
remained  silent.  He  leaves  all  of  them  to  the  hazard  of  birth 
and  speculation.^^ 

Thirdly,  Rousseau's  social  contract  is  neither  an  act  of  reci- 
procity between  individuals  nor  even  an  act  of  society.  Rousseau 
has  neglected  all  the  essential  conditions  of  a  free  contract — the 
absolute  liberty  of  the  contractor,  his  direct  and  personal  concern 

65  See  above  pp.  98-102. 

«6  Idee  Generale,  pp.  120-121. 

^Ubid:  pp.  116-120,  122. 


The  Defects  of  Rousseau  107 

with  the  contract.  The  social  contract  for  Rousseau  is  rather  an 
act  creating  arbiters,  chosen  by  the  people.  These  arbiters  are 
invested  with  power  sufficient  to  carry  out  their  judgment  or 
desire.^*  "Where  in  your  so-called  contract  do  you  provide  for 
my  rights  and  stipulate  my  duties?"  Proudhon  asked.  "Without 
such  provisions  and  stipulations  your  punishment  for  crime  is  an 
excess  of  power;  your  juristic  state,  flagrant  usurpation;  your 
policies,  your  judgment  and  your  execution  are  all  abusive  acts."  ^^ 

Fourthly,  the  chief  aim  of  Rousseau's  contract  being  the 
protection  of  persons  and  properties,  his  contract  is,  therefore, 
nothing  other  than  a  defensive  and  offensive  alHance  of  those. 
who  possess  property  against  those  who  do  not.  It  is  the  coali- 
tion of  the  barons  of  property,  of  commerce  and  of  industry 
against  the  disinherited  proletariat.  It  is  a  pact  of  hatred,  a 
monument  of  incurable  misanthropy.  It  is  the  oath  of  social 
war  which  Rousseau  presumptously  calls  the  social  contract.^" 
It  is,  finally,  a  dangerous  fiction  which  tends  to  nothing  less  than  I 
the  annihilation  of  liberty.'^^ 

Proudhon  is,  however,  not  an  obstinate  opponent,  but  an  en- 
thusiastic advocate,  of  contract.  What  he  attacks  is  the  contract 
creating  arbiters,  not  the  contract  between  free  and  independent 
men.  According  to  him,  the  notion  of  contract  should  succeed 
that  of  government. '^^  The  regime  of  contract  should  be  substi- 
tuted for  the  regime  of  law.  This  would  constitute  the  true 
government  of  man,  the  true  sovereignty  of  the  people,  the  true 
republic. ^^ 

In  discussing  Proudhon's  theory  of  contract,  we  may,  for 
the  sake  of  convenience,  divide  his  work  into  three  parts:  (x) 
How  would  the  contract  be  drawn  up?  (y)  what  would  be  its 
fundamental  principles?  and  (z)  how  would  it  be  observed? 

^^Ibid:  pp.  118-19.    See  also  Philosophie  du  Progres,  pp.  38-39.     Idee 
Generale,  p.  98. 

69  Idee  Generale.  pp.  119-120. 

■'^Ihid:  pp.  120-121. 

■'-^Ihid:  p.  124.     (See  also  Osgood,  p.  9.) 

■'^Ihid:  p.  130. 

73  Justice  II,  p.  527. 


io8  The  Political  Theories  of  P,  J.  Proudhon 

(x)  How  would  the  contract  be  drawn  up? 

The  contract  would  be  an  act,  by  which  two  or  several  indi- 
viduals would  agree  to  organize  for  a  fixed  time  the  industrial 
power  which  we  have  called  barter  and  exchange.  In  conse- 
quence the  contractors  would  reciprocally  guarantee  to  each 
other  a  certain  amount  of  services,  products,  advantages,  or 
duties  which  they  are  in  the  position  of  procuring  from,  or 
rendering  to,  each  other.^*  The  formula  of  the  contract  would 
be  as  follows:  "Promise  to  respect  the  person,  liberty  and  prop- 
erty of  your  brothers;  promise  never  to  take  their  product  or 
possessions  by  violence,  by  fraud,  by  usury  or  by  stock- jobbing; 
and  above  all,  promise  never  to  deceive  in  justice,  in  commerce 
or  in  any  of  your  transactions,"^^ 

(y)  What  would  be  the  fundamental  principles  of  the  free 
contract  ? 

The  fundamental  principles  of  Proudhon's  proposed  free  con- 
tract are  fivefold.  First,  the  idea  of  contract  is  exclusive  of  that 
of  government,  or  of  authority.  Under  the  institution  of  authority, 
liberty  and  the  well-being  of  the  people  would  be  greatly  dim- 
inished.^^ Second,  the  contract  cannot  be  perpetual.  The  idea 
of  the  communists  that  the  contract  is  signed  once  for  all  eternity 
is  absolutely  wrong.  It  must  be  subject  to  revision.'''^  Thirdly, 
the  contract  must  be  free.  It  must  be  freely  debated,  consented 
to  and  signed  by  all  those  who  participate  in  the  agreement.^*  It 
must  be  the  expression  of  the  free  will  of  the  social  individual.'^^ 
In  short,  it  must  be  a  free  contract  which  tends  to  unite  all  the 
contracting  groups.^"  Fourthly,  the  contract  must  be  reciprocal. 
It  must  be  an  act  by  which  those  who  have  formed  themselves 
into  groups  declare  the  identity  and  solidarity  of  their  respective 

^*  Idee  Generale,  pp.  116-117. 

'5  Ibid:  p.  312. 

76/&id;  pp.  116-117,  236. 

77  Justice  II,  p.  527. 

78  Idee  Generale,  p.  118   (See  also  116-117). 
7o/fei3;  p.  174. 

»o  Ibid:  p.  236. 


The  Free  Contract  109 

dignities  and  interests,  and,  therefore,  assure  to  each  other  mutual 
guarantees.^^  Fifthly,  the  basis  of  the  contract  must  be  economic. 
It  should  be  an  economic  rather  than  a  political  contract.^^ 

So  far  we  have  discussed  the  main  principles  of  contract. 
There  is  still  one  compHcated  question  remaining  to  be  considered 
— that  is,  whether  the  contract  should  be  general  or  special.  In 
respect  to  this  question  Proudhon's  idea  changed:  (1)  In 
favor  of  universal  contract  (1851)  and  (2)  in  favor  of  special 
contract   (1858). 

In  1851  Proudlion  thought  that  the  contract  ought  to  embrace 
the  universality  of  all  the  citizens,  of  all  their  interests,  and  of 
all  their  relationships.  If  any  one  man  is  excluded  from  the 
contract,  or  if  any  one  interest  in  which  any  member  of  the  nation 
is  concerned,  is  omitted  in  the  contract,  the  contract  would  be 
more  or  less  special.  It  could  not  then  be  called  social.  The 
social  contract  ought  to  increase  each  citizen's  liberty  and  well- 
being.  If  any  one  class  of  the  people  finds  itself,  by  virtue  of  the 
contract,  subdued  and  exploited  by  the  other,  the  contract  would 
become  null  and  void.  It  would  then  be  a  fraud.  It  could  then 
at  any  time,  and  with  full  right,  be  revoked  and  annulled  by  the 
people. ^^ 

In  1858,  however,  Proudhon  changed  his  view.  He  then 
contended  that  the  contract  could  not  be  general.  It  ought  to 
be  special.  The  idea  of  the  communist  that  there  should  be  only 
one  contract  for  the  whole  of  humanity  and  of  all  its  affairs 
is  entirely  wrong.  "One  who  engages  himself  in  an  association 
of  this  kind  .  .  .  .,"  said  Proudhon,  "is  surrounded  with 
numerous  obstacles  and  is  submitted  to  numerous  burdens.  He 
does  not  have  any  initiative."  ^*  Proudhon,  therefore,  believed 
that  society  could  not  engage  all  the  actions  of  men  by  a  general 
contract  without  destroying  in  itself  all  personality  and  liberty 


^^Ibid:  p.  222. 

82  Bougie,  pp.  244-245. 

S3  Idee  Generale,  pp.  117-118. 

84  Justice  II,  pp.  527-528. 

85  Fourniere,  p.   192. 


85 


no  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

(z)  How  would  the  contract  be  observed? 

One  who  is  constituted  a  member  of  society  through  the 
sentiment  of  justice  which  is  immanent  in  his  nature,  is  no  longer 
the  same  as  one  who  lives  in  a  state  of  isolation.  Without 
abandoning  the  rule  of  well-being,  he  will  subordinate  himself  to 
what  is  just.  Through  the  lapse  of  time  justice  would  become 
for  him  a  habit,  a  need,  a  second  nature.  In  other  words,  it 
would  become  another  egoism  for  him.  He  would  discover  in  the 
observation  of  the  contract  a  superior  felicity.®^ 

(c)   The  organization  of  universal  suffrage. 

Proudhon  denounced  the  old  system  of  universal  suffrage  as 
the  estrangement  of  public  conscience,  the  suicide  of  popular 
sovereignty,  and  the  apostasy  of  revolution.^^ 

In  the  first  place,  the  majority  of  the  people  are  unintelH- 
gent.s-^  They  are  incapable  of  discerning  at  the  first  glance  the 
merit  and  the  honesty  of  candidates.**^  Very  often  the  candidates 
are  designated  in  advance.  The  worker  nominates  his  employer ; 
the  domestic  his  master ;  the  farmer  his  landlord ;  the  soldier  his 
general.  If  we  would  give  the  vote  to  the  woman  she  would 
elect  her  husband.  If  we  would  give  the  children  the  vote,  they 
would  elect  their  father.^"  As  long  as  people  are  uneducated, 
universal  suffrage  is  not  an  organ  of  progress,  but  a  drag-chain 
on  liberty.^^  It  is  bound  to  violate  the  social  will  in  its  legitimate 
manifestations.^^  "Whoever  preaches  universal  suffrage  as  the 
principle  of  order  and  certainty  is  a  liar,  a  charlatan,"  said 
Proudhon.     "Sovereignty  without  knowledge  is  blind."®^ 

In  the  second  place  universal  suffrage  is  contra-revolutionary. 
It  is   retrograding.     Man  has  generally  two  instincts,  the  one 

86  Justice  I,  p.  222. 
»''  Ibid:  II,  pp.  4,   144. 

88  What  is  Property,  pp.  19-20. 

89  Idee  Generale,  p.  145.     See  also  Miilberger,  "Studicn  .  .  ."  p.  ZZ. 

90  Justice  VI,  p.   105. 

91  Miilberger  "Studien  .  .  .,"  p.  44. 

92  Desjardin  II,  p.  216.     Proudhon's  letter  of  Sept.  27,   1853. 

93  Corresp.  I.  p.  275. 


Against  Universal  Suffrage  hi 

for  conservation,  the  other  for  progress.  Each  of  these  two 
instincts  never  acts  except  in  the  interests  of  the  other.  Thus 
each  individual,  judging  everything  from  the  point  of  view  of 
his  private  interests,  understands  by  progress  the  development 
of  his  private  interests  which  are  contrary  to  the  collective  in- 
terests. The  result  of  universal  suffrage  vviH  be  general  retro- 
gression instead  of  general  progression.^* 

In  the  third  place,  universal  suffrage  is  the  principle  of 
political  atheism.  It  is  atomistic.  The  legislator,  unable  to  make 
the  people  speak  in  a  substantial  unity,  invites  them  to  express 
their  idea  per  capita.  The  surest  way  of  making  the  people  He 
is  to  establish  universal  suffrage.^^ 

In  the  fourth  place,  universal  suffrage  legalizes  oppression. 
When  the  theorists  of  popular  sovereignty  claim  that  the  remedy 
for  the  tyranny  of  power  consists  of  the  establishment  of  popular 
suffrage  from  which  power  will  be  drawn,  they  have  turned  like 
squirrels  in  their  cage.  From  the  moment  the  chief  elements  of 
power,  that  is,  authority,  property,  and  hierarchy,  become  fixed, 
the  suffrage  of  the  people  becomes  no  more  than  the  consent  of 
the  people  to  their  oppression.®^ 

In  the  fifth  place,  universal  suffrage  is  a  child's  plan,®^  a 
true  lottery.  It  neglects  individual  rights.  "Over  the  principle," 
said  Proudhon,  "or  the  very  essence  of  rights  .  .  .  over  the 
organization  of  industrial  forces,  over  my  work,  my  subsistence, 
my  life  ...  I  denounce  all  presumptive  authority,  all  in- 
direct solutions.  I  wish  to  treat  them  directly,  individually,  for 
myself."  ®^ 

In  the  sixth  place,  universal  suffrage  considers  the  sum  total 
of  the  individuals,  instead  of  society  as  a  whole,  as  the  sovereign. 


^*  Melange  I,  p.  15.    See  also  Miilberger  "Studien  .  .  ."  pp.  18-21. 
85  Melange  I,  pp.  19-20.    Solution  du  Probleme  Social,  p.  62.    See  also 
Miilberger  "Studien  .  .  .,"  p.  18. 

96  Desjardin  II,  p.  223. 

97  Idee  Generale,  p.  150. 
^^Ibid:  p.  146. 


112  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

It  confuses  the  generality  o£  an  opinion  with  the  social  idea,  the 
action  of  a  multitude  with  the  action  of  society.®® 

In  the  seventh  place,  universal  suffrage  means  the  triumph  of 
the  minority.  We  may  take  the  election  of  1848  for  example. 
In  that  election  more  than  400,000  citizens  had  the  right  to  vote 
in  the  Department  of  the  Seine.  But  only  300,000  participated 
in  the  election.  About  100,000  were  absent.  Of  the  300,000 
votes,  only  thirteen  candidates  received  more  than  one  half  of 
the  votes  cast.  There  were  twenty-one  candidates  who  were 
elected  only  by  a  relative  majority  of  144,000  to  104,000  votes. 
How  could  they  be  called  the  representatives  of  the  people  when 
they  were  elected  by  only  a  minority  of  them  ?  ^^^ 

Proudhon  attacked  not  the  principle,  but  only  the  old  system, 
of  universal  suffrage.  What  he  intended  to  do  was  not  to 
abolish,  but  to  reorganize  it.  In  order  to  make  universal  suffrage 
intelligent,  moral  and  democratic,  it  is  necessary,  he  maintained, 
after  organizing  the  balance  of  services  and  assuring,  by  free 
discussion,  the  independence  of  suffrage,  to  provide  that  the 
citizens  yote  by  groups,  according  to  their  respective  occupations, 
in  conformity  with  the  principle  of  collective  force  which  is  the 
basis  of  society  and  the  state.^"^  The  candidates  of  the  people 
would  then  represent  positive  interests.  They  would  be  the 
expression  of  organized  labor.  The  people  would  have  real  repre- 
sentation and  real  elections. ^^^ 

III.     What  are  the  general  characteristics  of  anarchism? 

Proudhon's  theory  of  anarchy  may  be  divided  into  four 
periods:  (1)  Anarchy  vaguely  defined  (1840-1847),  (2)  anarchy, 
the  real  formula  of  the  republic  (1840-1850),  (3)  anarchy  in 
its  purest  form  (1851-1857),  and  (4)  the  anarchistic  state 
(1858). 


»»  Corresp.  V,  pp.  266,  268. 
100  Melange  I,  p.  20. 
i«i  Justice  II,  pp.  4,  128,  145. 
102  Melange  I,  p.  43. 


Characteristics  of  Anarchism  113 

(1)  Anarchy  vaguely  defined   (1840-1847). 

Proudhon  constantly  changed  his  idea,  now  lingering  upon 
the  ideas  of  governmentalism,  and  statism,  and  now  endeavor- 
ing to  abolish  them  completely.  From  1840  to  1847  his  thought 
was  always  vague  and  even  superficial.  First,  he  defined  anarchy 
as  the  absence  of  master  and  sovereign.^"-^  Regarding  questions 
of  how  to  constitute  the  regulation  of  anarchy  he  was  silent. 
Second,  he  fought  against  authority.  "I  labor  to  stir  up  the 
reason  of  individuals  to  insurrection  against  the  reason  of  auth- 
orities," said  he.  '"According  to  the  law  of  the  society  of  which 
I  am  a  member,  all  the  evils  which  afflict  humanity  arise  from 
faith  in  external  teachings  and  submission  to  authority.^"*  Thirdly, 
he  attacked  government  and  the  state.  Government  of  man  by 
man,  under  whatever  name  it  may  disguise  itself,  is  the  reign  of 
will,  of  caprice  and  of  oppression.^°^  The  state,  whatever  form 
it  may  assume,  aristocratic  or  theocratic,  monarchical  or  repub- 
lican, as  long  as  it  is  not  the  organ  of  a  society  of  equals,  will 
be  for  the  people  a  hell  and  a  damnation." 


106 


(2)  Anarchy  the  real  formula  of  the  republic  (1848-1850). 

From  1848  to  1850  Proudhon's  idea  became  both  negative 
and  positive.  Negatively  he  attacked  authority,^"^  government, 
the  state"^  and  capital.  Government  of  man  by  man  is  slavery.^^^ 
Its  chief  aim  is  to  protect  the  rich  against  the  poor.^^°  The 
productivity  of  capital,  which  Christianity  has  condemned  under 
the  name  of  usury,  is  the  true  cause  of  poverty,  the  eternal 
obstacle  to  the  establishment  of  the  true  republic.^^^  Positively, 
he  developed  from  the  theory  of  anarchy  the  theory  of  the  re- 

"3  Qu'est-ce  que  la  propriete,  premier  memoire,  p.  216. 
104  Ibid:  deuxieme  memorie,  p.  354. 
^^^Ibid:  premier  memoire,  p.  30. 
lo^Cont.  Eco.,  I,  p.  267. 

107  Melange  II,  pp.  12-13. 

108  Solution  du  Probleme  Social,  p.  49.     Melange  II,  p.  14. 
io9Diehl  pp.  110-11. 

iio/feid;  pp.  107-108. 
Ill  Melange  I,  p.   184. 


114  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

public.  In  one  place  he  considered  anarchy  as  the  real  formula 
of  the  republic.^^^  In  another,  he  defined  the  republic  as  positive 
anarchy.^^^ 

The  republic,  as  conceived  by  him  in  1849,  was  not  anarchy 
in  its  purest  form,  but  direct  popular  government.  "In  the  re- 
public," he  said,  "all  the  citizens  in  doing  what  they  desire  and 
nothing  more  than  they  desire,  will  participate  as  directly  in 
legislation  and  government  as  they  participate  in  production  and 
the  circulation  of  wealth.^^*  The  republic  is  also  another  name 
for  pure  democracy.  In  pure  democracy  all  the  citizens  ought 
to  participate  in  the  formation  of  the  law,  in  the  government  of 
the  state,  in  the  exercise  of  public  functions,  in  the  discussion  of 
the  budget,  in  the  nomination  of  the  functionaries. ^^^  Thus  in 
1849  the  republic  meant  for  Proudhon  direct  government  or  pure 
democracy.  It  was  opposed  to  monarchy  as  well  as  to  de- 
mocracy^^^  in  its  sophisticated  form,  that  is,  democracy  of  tlie 
proletariat.^^''^ 

No  less  important  a  fact  we  have  to  notice  is  the  distinction 
between  the  governmental  republic  and  the  perfect  republic,  or 
the  republic  of  anarchy.  "In  order  to  establish  the  republic,  the 
last  expression  of  the  revolution,  it  is  necessary  to  begin  by  the 
establishment  of  the  governmental  republic,"  said  Proudhon. ^^^ 
What  is  meant  by  him  here  as  the  governmental  republic  is  the 
republic  in  which  the  legislator  and  the  magistrate  act  in  con- 
formity with  the  instinct  and  general  tendencies  of  the  people. 
What  is  meant  by  him  as  the  real  republic,  or  in  other  words, 
the  most  perfect  form  of  the  republic,  is  the  government  in  which 
every  citizen  is  legislator  and  magistrate. ^^^ 

The  main  characteristics  of  the  real  republic  are  fivefold. 

"2  Melange  II,  pp.  12-13. 

"3  Solution  du  Probleme  Social,  p.  87. 

"4/6id:  pp.  2  and  87. 

^^^Ibid:  p.  61. 

^■^^Ibid:  p.  87. 

'^'^''  Ihid:  p.  61.    See  Ch.  V  for  his  criticism  of  democracy. 

118  Melange  II,  p.  205. 

^■^^Ibid:  I,  p.  84. 


Anarchy  the  Real  Republic  115 

First,  the  republic,  or  anarchy,  is  the  affirmation  of  liberty — 
liberty  not  submitted  to  order  as  in  a  constitutional  monarchy, 
nor  imprisoned  in  order  as  in  the  provisional  government  of  1848, 
but  freed  from  all  its  obstacles,  superstitions,  prejudices,  sophisms 
and  authorities.  Liberty,  in  the  republic,  is  reciprocal.  It  is 
the  mother  rather  than  the  son  of  order.  All  the  opinions,  all 
the  attributes  of  the  people  are  free.  Everyone  is  king  because 
he  has  full  power.  He  governs  and  he  is  govemed.^^"  Again, 
liberty  in  the  republic  is  positive  as  well  as  negative.  The  liberty 
of  religion,  for  example,  is  negative,  but  the  liberty  of  free  credit, 
of  universal  association  or  of  integral  education  is  positive.^^^ 
Second,  in  the  republic,  the  people  would  be  autonomous.  They 
would  have  no  masters,  no  delegates,  no  representatives.^^-  Each 
one  of  them  would  be  legislator  and  magistrate.^^^  There  would 
be  no  other  rights  except  those  which  have  been  guaranteed  by 
the  people,  no  other  government  than  that  of  the  people,  no 
other  justice  than  that  of  the  people,  no  other  functionaries  than 
the  people  themselves.  AH  is  for  the  people,  by  the  people.^^* 
Thirdly,  the  real  republic  means  equality- — the  coordinated  equal- 
ity of  functions  and  persons.-^^^  There  would  be  no  monopoly, 
no  castes,  no  inequality  of  conditions. ^^^  Fourthly,  the  basis  of 
the  real  republic  would  be  economic.  Its  social  constitution  would 
be  twofold :  ( 1 )  The  equilibrium  of  interests  founded  upon  free 
contract,^^'^  and  (2)  the  organization  of  economic  forces.    What 

120  Solution  du  Probleme  Social,  p.  87.  See  also  Melange  III,  p.  59, 
Confessions,  p.  27. 

121  Melange  II,  pp.  12-13;  III,  p.  147. 

^22  Ibid:  II,  pp.  12-13.    Solution  du  Probleme  Social,  p.  49. 

123  Ibid:  I,  p.  84. 

^^*Ibid:  pp.  115-116.    Ibid;  p.  84. 

^25  Ibid:  p.  141. 

^^^Ibid:  p.  115-116. 

127  An  Stelle  der  Gesetze  solten  f  reie  Vertrage  treten,  die  von  den 
Mitgliedern  der  einzelnen  wirtschaftlichen  Gruppen,  Vereine,  Gesell- 
schaften,  Korporationen,  Assoziationen  unter  einander  auf  Grundlage  des 
freie  Austausches  des  Produkte  und  des  unentgeltlichen  Kredits  gesch- 
lossen  werden."     Diehl,  pp.  107-108. 


ii6  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

Proudhon  meant  by  economic  forces  here,  included,  in  general, 
commerce,  competition,  money,  machines,  credit,  property,  col- 
lective power,  division  of  labor,  equality  in  transactions  and  the 
reciprocity  of  guarantees.^^^  As  a  result  of  the  economic  revolu- 
tion there  would  be  no  capital,^^^  no  state,  no  govemment,^^" 
no  strong  and  no  weak  in  soclety.^^^  Fifthly,  the  state  would 
be  absorbed  in  society.  By  the  cessation  of  authority,  the  sup- 
pression of  governmental  organs,  the  abolition  of  the  impost, 
the   simplification  of   the   administration,   and   the   organization 

of  universal  suffrage,  there  would  be  no  other  state  than  society 
itself.132. 

Between  1848  and  1850  Proudhon's  idea  went  from  a  state 
of  vagueness  to  a  state  of  confusion.  In  1840  he  fearlessly  at- 
tacked the  government  and  the  state,  but  he  had  no  definite  idea 
of  what  would  be  their  substitutes.  In  1840-1850  he  began  to 
have  a  general  idea  of  what  he  meant  by  anarchy,  but  he  con- 
fused anarchism  with  governmentalism.  Professing  himself  a 
deadly  enemy  to  government,  he  hesitated  to  eliminate  it  entirely. 
On  one  hand,  he  identified  anarchy  with  the  republic,  or  direct 
government.  What  he  intended  to  abolish  was  not  direct  gov- 
ernment, but  all  the  other  forms  of  government.  On  the  other 
hand,  he  admitted  that,  through  the  necessity  of  things,  there 
might  exist  a  government  which  would  be  subordinate  to  the 
people.^^^ 

(3)  The  universal  republic"*  or  anarchy  in  its  purest  form 
(1851-1857). 

In  1851  Proudhon's  theory  of  anarchy  reached  the  stage  of 
definiteness   and   clearness.     For   the  old   political   regime,   the 

128  Confessions,  p.   166-167. 

129  Melange  II,  pp.  15,  17.    "Capital  and  labor  will  be  identified." 
^^oibid:  II,  p.  9.    See  also  III,  p.  50. 

^^^Ibid:  II,  pp.  15-17. 

132  Ibid:  III,  p.  48. 

133/Wc?;  II,  p.  67. 

134  "L'institution  gouvernementale  abolie,  remplacee  par  I'organisation 
economique,  le  probleme  de  la  republique  universelle  est  resolu.  Idee 
Generale,  p.  298. 


The  Perfected  Doctrine  of  Anarchy  117 

regime  of  law,  of  authority,  of  divine  right,  he  desired  to  sub- 
stitute the  new  economic  regime,  the  regime  of  industry,  of  con- 
tract, and  of  human  rights.^^^  The  chief  characteristics  of  the 
new  regime  would  be  sevenfold.  First,  Proudhon  denounced 
authority,  or  the  absolute  being.  He  would  substitute  for  it 
the  synthetic  and  positive  idea  of  economics.^^^  Second,  he 
denied  the  state,  the  police  and  the  public  minister.  As  soon  as 
society  should  become  well  organized,  all  of  these  would  dis- 
appear.^^^  There  would  be  no  state,  no  nation,  no  war.  There 
would  exist  only  a  great  harmonious  humanity.^^^  Thirdly,  he 
denied  all  the  forms  of  government.  There  would  be  no  more 
monarchy,  no  more  aristocracy,  »o  more  democracy.  But  the 
most  significant  of  all  is  that  Proudhon  also  denied  direct  gov- 
ernment. "Direct  or  indirect,  simple  or  composite,"  said  he, 
"government  of  the  people  will  be  the  juggling  of  the  people.  It 
is  always  the  man  who  commands  the  man."^^^  Fourthly,  in 
anarchy,  each  citizen,  each  workshop,  each  corporation,  each 
department  would  be  sovereign.  In  consequence,  each  of  them 
would  act,  directly  and  by  itself,  in  the  management  of  its  re- 
spective interests  and  exercise  in  this  regard  the  full  power  of 
sovereignty.^*"  Each  of  them  would  have  its  own  police,  and 
administer  its  own  affairs.^*^  Fifthly,  in  anarchy  the  interests 
of  the  people  would  be  harmonious.  "The  people  are  nothing 
more  than  the  organic  union  of  wills  individually  free  and  sove- 
reign, which  union  could  and  ought  to  act  in  concert,  but  never 
be  dissolved,"  said  Proudhon.  "It  is  in  the  harmony  of  interests 
that  this  union  should  be  sought,  not  in  a  factitious  centralization 
which,  far  from  expressing  the  collective  will,  expresses  the 
alienation  of  the  particular  wills.^^^    Sixthly,  in  anarchy,  the  free 

135  Idee  Generale,  pp.  257-258. 

136  Philosophie  du  Progres,  p.  48. 

137  Idee  Revolutionnaire,  p.  91. 
i38Diehl,  pp.  115-116. 

139  Idee  Generale,  p.  130. 
^^oibid:  p.  292. 
^^^Ibid:  p.  289. 
^^^Ibid:  p.  292. 


ii8  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

contract  would  be  substituted  for  law.  The  producer  would 
treat  with  the  consumer,  the  commune  with  the  canton,  the 
canton  with  the  department,  etc.  It  would  be  always  the  same 
interests  which  would  be  exchanged,  adjusted,  and  balanced  widi 
each  other  to  the  infinite.^'^^  Seventhly,  science,  particularly  the 
science  of  economics,  instead  of  religion  or  authority,  would  be 
the  general  rule  of  society  and  the  sovereign  arbiter  of  the  in- 
terests. The  truth  of  science  is  universal.  It  knows  no  dis- 
tinction between  nations  or  races.     It  is  the  unity  of  mankind.^^^ 

To  sum  up,  the  new  regime  of  anarchy  would  substitute  in- 
dustrial organization  for  government,  contract  for  law,  economic 
forces  for  political  power,  collective  force  for  public  power, 
industrial  societies  for  standing  armies,  identity  of  interests  for 
police,  economic  centralization  for  political  centralization,  and 
finally  the  classification  and  specializing  of  agricultural,  industrial 
and  commercial  functions  in  place  of  the  old  class  distinction 
between  the  nobles  and  the  serfs  or  between  the  bourgeoisie  and 
the  plebeians.^^^ 

(4)  Anarchy  and  the  state  (1858). 

In  1858,  Proudhon  changed  his  idea  again.  He  now  became 
more  or  less  moderate.  For  the  sake  of  clearness  we  may  classify 
his  work  into  two  parts:  (a)  His  criticism  of  the  old  regime, 
and  (b)  the  establishment  of  the  new  regime. 

(a)  His  criticism  of  the  old  regime. 

Proudhon  denounced  authority,  government  and  the  state  be- 
cause they  all  protect  capitalism  against  the  proletariat.^^^  He 
attacked  monarchy,  aristocracy  and  democracy.  "Democracy," 
said  he,  "is  simply  a  lie.""'^ 

(b)  The  establishment  of  the  new  regime — the  republic. 

In  contrasting  Proudhon's  idea  of  1858  with  that  of  1851, 
we  see  two  great  differences  in  the  development  of  his  thought. 

"3  ide  Gencrale,  pp.  283-284. 

"4  Ibid:  pp.  297-300. 

1*5  Ibid:  p.  259.     See  also  Philosophic  du  Progres,  p.  56. 

"6  Justice  II,  pp.  4  and  70.    V,  p.  184. 

"7/fcid;  II,  pp.  115-116.     (See  also  pp.  9-10.) 


The  Anarhists  State  119 

First,  in  1851  Proudhon  attacked  authority  and  the  state  just  as 
if  they  were  two  synonymous  terms.  In  1858,  he  differentiated 
the  state  from  authority.  It  was  authority,  not  the  state,  that 
he  then  attacked.^*^  Second,  in  1851,  he  thought  that  there 
should  be  no  government,  no  state  in  anarchy.  But  in  1858,  he 
strongly  affirmed  the  function  of  the  state  in  civilization.  "The 
state,"  he  said,  "is  the  most  energetic  agent  of  civilization."^^^ 
When  he  denied  the  state  or  government  it  was  not  the  state 
or  government  of  the  new  regime,  but  that  of  the  old  regime. 
In  other  words,  he  desired  to  create  a  new  state  and  a  new- 
government  in  anarchy. 

(x)  The  new  state  of  anarchy. 

The  fundamental  principles  of  the  new  state  would  be  (1) 
the  developm.ent  of  economic  forces,  the  first  of  which  would 
be  the  collective  force,  (2)  the  discovery  of  social  power  in 
the  relation  of  all  the  forces  of  society  to  each  other,  (3)  the 
idea  of  universal  solidarity  of  humanitarian  force,  emerging  now 
from  the  struggle  between,  and  now  from  the  harmony  of,  the 
states,  (4)  the  balancing  of  economic  or  social  forces,  and  (5) 
the  elaboration  of  rights,  the  supreme  expression  of  man  and  of 
society.^^®  The  aim  of  the  new  state  would  be  to  organize  justice 
and  make  it  effective.  Justice  is  the  law  of  the  material,  intel- 
lectual and  moral  world.  It  is  the  essential  attribute,  the  principal 
function  of  the  state.     Its  formula  is  equality.^^^ 

(y)  The  new  government  of  anarchy — the  real  republic.^^^ 

The  real  republic  is  a  government  in  which  liberty  and  right 
would  play  the  first  role  in  opposition  to  all  the  other  forms  of 
government  founded  upon  the  preponderance  of  authority  and 
the  "reason  of  state."    The  more  the  action  of  liberty  and  right 


"8  Justice  V,  pp.   183-184. 
"9  76iJ;  p.  183. 
150/fcj'd;  II,  pp.  116-117. 
"1  Ibid:  V,  p.  64. 

152  "The  republic  is  organized  according  to  the  principle  of  economy 
and  of  right."    Justice  II,  p.  132. 


120  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

would  be  generalized,  the  more  would  the  republic  be  perfected. ^^•'^ 
In  order  to  establish  the  republican  government  in  the  true  sense 
of  the  word,  the  following  five  conditions  would  be  necessary: — 
(1)  The  definition  of  economic  right,  (2)  the  balance  of  econ- 
omic forces,  the  formation  of  agricultural,  industrial  and  com- 
mercial groups,^^*  and  the  organization  of  the  services  of  public 
utility  (credit,  discount,  circulation  and  transportation,  etc.)  ac- 
cording to  the'  principle  of  mutuality,  of  gratuity,  or  of  net  cost, 
(3)  the  creation  of  political  guarantees,  that  is,  liberty  of  press 
and  of  platform,  liberty  of  meeting  and  of  association,  complete 
separation  of  justice  and  of  government,  (4)  administrativ.e 
decentralization,  and  resurrection  of  communal  and  provincial 
life,  and  (5)  cessation  of  the  state  of  war,  demolition  of  fort- 
resses and  the  abolition  of  the  standing  army.  Under  these  five 
conditions  the  principle  of  authority  would  tend  to  disappear. 
The  state,  "the  public  thing,"  would  rest  upon  an  unshaken  basis 
of  right  and  liberty.  Government  in  its  true  sense  (that  is,  in 
its  old  sense  of  authority)  would  not  exist.  Society  would  be 
carried  on  by  its  liberal  and  balanced  forces.^^^ 

Proudhon  is  confident  about  the  triumph  of  the  revolution.^^^ 
Very  often  he  indulged  in  the  imagination  of  a  revolutionary 
Utopia.  "Humanity,"  he  said,  "is,  above  all,  passionate.  What 
should  be  our  lives  when  we  have  no  prince  to  lead  us  to  war, 
no  priests  to  assist  us  in  piety,  no  great  personages  to  draw  our 
admiration,  no  villains  or  paupers  to  excite  our  sensibility :  when 
we  could  do  what  the  philosopher  Martin  recommended  in  Can- 
dide,  we  could  cultivate  our  gardens.  The  exploitation  of  the 
soil,  formerly  the  work  of  the  slave,  would  become  the  first  of 
the  fine  arts  as  it  is  the  first  of  the  industries.  We  would  pass 
our  time  in  the  calm  of  our  lives  and  the  serenity  of  our  spirits.^^^ 

The  development  of  Proudhon's  political  thought  from  1840 
to  1858  is  clearly  shown  in  the  following  summary : 


153  Justice  V,  pp.   178-179. 
154 /6id;   II,  pp.   120-121. 
155/t,Vi;    V,   p.    179. 

156  Idee  Generale,  p.  9. 

157  Justice  II,  p.   133. 


Growth  of  Anarchic  Doctrine  121 

(1)  Anarchy   chiefly   negative    (1840-1847) 

(a)  Definition— anarchy,  the  absence  of  master,  of  sovereign. 

(b)  Criticism  against  government  and  the  state. 

(2)  Anarchy,  the  real  formula  of  the  republic  (1848-1849) 

(a)  Negative 

(x)   Criticism  against  government 
(y)   Criticism  against  the  state 

(b)  Positive 

(x)  The  republic — positive  anarchy 
(y)  The  republic — direct  government 
(z)  The  republic — pure  democracy 

(3)  Universal  republic,  or  anarchy  in  its  purest  form 

(a)  Negative 

(x)  No  government   (against  direct  government  also) 
(y)   No  state 

(b)  Positive 

(x)   Economic  organization  for  government 
(y)   Contract  for  law 

(4)  Anarchy  or  the  republic 

(a)  Negative 

(x)   Criticism  against  authority 
(y)   Criticism  against  government 
(z)   Criticism  against  the  state 

(b)  Positive 

(x)  The  state  as  distinct  from  authority  still  exists 
(y)  Government  in  its  true  sense  does  not  exist. 


CHAPTER  VII 

Proudhon's  Theory  of  the  State  from  the  Standpoint  of  a 

Federalist  (1862-1865). 

Proudhon  acknowledged  that  he  had  been  an  anarchist  al- 
most all  his  life.  In  1851  he  defined  his  role  as  a  theorist  of 
anarchy.^  He,  however,  changed  his  idea  constantly.  "After 
having  denied  the  state,"  he  wrote  in  1850  to  his  friend  Darimon, 
"we  ought  to  make  it  understood  that  the  question  in  point  is  to 
carry  on  a  simplification  of  the  state  to  the  vanishing  point,  not 
to  realize  an  immediate  anarchy."-  After  1862  he  definitely 
abandoned  his  anarchistic  theory  and  formulated  the  theory  of 
federalism.^ 

His  theory  of  federalism  passed  through  four  stages  of  de- 
velopment: (1)  Federalism  of  the  nobles  (1840),  (2)  universal 
federalism  (1858),  (3)  Italian  federation  (1861),  and  (4) 
federation  of  the  small  communities  (1863).* 

In  1840  he  had  not  the  faintest  idea  of  considering  federalism 
as  the  ideal  form  of  the  state.  "What  was  federalism?"  he  asked. 
"A  confederation  of  the  great  lords  against  the  villeins  and  the 
king  .  .  .  How  did  federalism  end?  In  the  alliance  of  the  com- 
munes and  the  royal  authority.  .  .  .  What  was  the  immediate 
result  of  the  struggle  of  the  communes  and  the  king  against  the 
nobles?    The  monarchical  unity  of  Louis  XIV."  ^ 

In  1858  his  attitude  toward  federalism  became  more  favor- 
able.     "Glorious    thought    of    Henry    IV,"    said    Proudhon,    "is 

1  Letter  of  March  7,  1851. 

2  Corresp.  Ill  p.  96. 

3  Bougie,  p.  225.     Desjardin  II,  p.  228. 

*  In  French,  the  word  is  "etat"  which  is  literally  "state,"  but  in  fact 
Proudhon   was  referring  to   "communities." 

5  What  is  Property?    (Second  Memoir.)   pp.  35-36. 


Federalism   Versus   Anarchism  123 

universal  federalism,  supreme  guarantee  of  all  liberty  and  of  all 
right.    Federalism  is  the  political  formula  of  humanity."^ 

In  1861,  after  Garibaldi's  expedition  and  the  battle  of  Castel- 
fidardo,  Proudhon  immediately  saw  that  the  establishment  of 
Italian  unity  would  be  a  severe  blow  to  the  European  equilibrium. 
It  was  chiefly  in  order  to  maintain  this  equilibrium  that  he  came 
out  so  energetically  in  favor  of  Italian  federation,  even  though 
at  first  it  should  be  only  a  federation  of  monarchs.  To  maintain 
European  equilibrium  by  diminishing  great  states  and  multiplying 
small  ones;  to  unite  the  latter  in  organized  federations,  not  for 
attack  but  for  defense;  and  with  these  federations  (which  if  not 
republican  already,  would  quickly  become  so)  to  hold  the  great 
military  monarchs  in  check: — this  was  his  political  program  at 
the  beginnmg  of  the  year  1861.'^  Later  in  the  same  year  he 
published  "La  Guerre  et  la  Paix,"  in  which  he  saw  in  the 
principle  of  federalism  the  just  equilibrium  of  liberty  and  gov- 
ernment.^ 

But  it  was  only  in  1862  that  Proudhon  definitely  set  federalism 
as  a  principle  over  against  anarchism.  "If  I  began  with  anarch- 
ism in  1840  because  my  study  of  government  compelled  me  to 
such  a  conclusion  then,"  he  said,  "I  now  end  with  federalism 
because  I  am  convinced  that  it  provides  the  truly  proper  safe- 
S^uards  for  the  rights  of  Europe's  people,  and  is  the  imperative 
s^roundwork  for  the  organization  of  all  its  states."^ 

The  chief  difference  between  anarchism  and  federalism  is 
that  while  anarchy  is  the  affirmation  of  liberty  ^°  and  the  negation 
of  authority,^^  federation  is  the  balancing  of  authority  and 
liberty.^2  Between  1840  and  1858,  Proudlion  was  always  a  deadly 
enemy  of  authority  and  a  passionate  lover  of  liberty.     In  1863, 

6  Justice  II,  p.  120. 

7  What  is  Property?  (Preface)  p.  25. 
sCorresp.  I,  pp.  XXXVII. 

®  Letter  to  his  friend,  Nov.  2,  1862.  (See  also  Lagarde,  p.  40,  Des- 
jardin  II,  p.  227.) 

1°  Revolution  Social,  p.  166.     Melange  III,  p.   147. 

11  What  is  Property,  p.  354. 

12  Du  Principe  Federatif,  p.  11. 


124  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

however,  he  realized  that  hberty  could  not  exist  without  authority, 
and  vice  versa.  The  chief  problem  for  him  was  not  to  suppress 
authority  in  favor  of  liberty,  but  to  find  the  equilibrium  between 
these  two  conflicting  elements.  All  false  balances  mean  disorder 
and  ruin  for  states  and  oppression  and  misery  for  their  citizens. ^^ 
In  consequence,  Proudhon  substituted  the  theory  of  federation 
for  that  of  anarchy. 

Before  discussing  his  theory  of  federalism,  we  may,  first, 
consider  his  ideas  concerning  various  types  of  government.  There 
are  two  kinds  of  government :  that  of  theory  and  that  of  fact. 
What  Proudhon  considered  before  1858  was  the  government  of 
fact.  What  he  discussed  in  1863  was,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
government  of  theory,  or  a  priori  government. 

The  government  of  theory,  according  to  Proudhon,  is  based 
upon  two  opposing  principles :  authority  and  liberty.  From  these 
two  opposing  principles,  the  political  theorists  deduce  two  oppos- 
ing regimes :  the  regime  of  authority  and  the  regime  of  liberty. 
The  regime  of  authority  may  be  divided  into  two  classes  of  gov- 
ernment: (a)  monarchy  and  (b)  communism.  The  regime  of 
liberty  may  be  further  divided  into  two  kinds  of  government: 
(a)  democracy  and  (b)  anarchy.  The  essential  character  of  the 
first  regime  is  the  non-separation  of  powers ;  the  essential  charac- 
ter of  the  second  is  the  separation  of  powers.^* 

Monarchy  is  the  government  of  all  by  one  alone.^^  The 
prince  is  the  legislator,  administrator,  judge,  general  and  pontiff 
of  the  state.  He  has  eminent  domain  over  land  and  rent.  He 
is  the  chief  of  art,  of  trade,  of  commerce,  of  agriculture,  of  the 
marine  and  of  public  instruction.  He  is  invested  with  all  rights 
and  all  authority.  In  short,  he  is  the  representative  of  society, 
the  incarnation  of  the  state.^® 

Communism  is  the  government  of  all  by  all.^''  The  powers 
of  government  without  any  separation  are  exercised  by  the  social 

13  Du  Principe  Fcderatif,  pp.  10-11,  33. 

14  Du  Principe  Federatif,  pp.  13-14. 
15/feid;  p.  13. 

16  Ibid:  p.  20. 
^Uhid:  13-14. 


Government  Reclaasfied  125 

collectivity.     In  Athens,  for  instance,  criminal  judgments  were 
given  by  the  entire  mass  of  its  citizens.^^ 

Democracy  is  the  government  of  all  by  each.^^  It  is  the 
spontaneous  expression  of  liberty.  In  a  democratic  state,  all  the 
citizens  would  agree  to,  and  would  sign  a  social  contract.  The 
aliens  too  would  adhere  to  the  same  contract  and  would  be  given 
the  same  rights  as  the  citizens  of  the  state.^°  The  chief  difference 
between  monarchy  and  democracy  is  that  in  a  democracy  the 
powers  of  government  are  separable,  while  in  a  monarchy  they 
are  not.^^ 

Anarchy  is  the  government  of  each  by  each.^^  The  political 
functions  would  give  place  to  economic  functions.  All  govern- 
mental institutions  would  be  abolished.  The  basis  of  society 
would  be  property  and  free  labor.^^ 

Proudhon  favored  neither  democratic  absolutism  nor  bour- 
geois constitutionalism.  Democratic  absolutism,  according  to 
him,  is  unstable.  It  is  retrogressive.  It  has  no  restrictions,  nor 
principles.  It  is  contemptuous  of  rights,  hostile  to  liberty  and 
destructive  of  security  and  confidence.  No  less  unstable  is 
bourgeois  constitutionalism.  With  its  legal  form,  its  juristic 
spirit,  and  its  parliamentary  solemnities,  it  is  a  vast  system  under 
which  politics  are  a  matter  of  stock  jobbing,  and  taxation,  the 
civil  list  of  a  caste.^* 

Still  more  violent  was  his  criticism  against  communism,  which 
is  to  him  the  subordination  of  the  individual  to  the  group,^^  the 
exploitation  of  the  strong  by  the  weak.^^  In  other  words,  it  is 
nothing  less  than  the  annihilation  of  the  individual,^'^  the  ex- 

is  Principe  Federatif,  p.  21. 

^^Ibid:  pp.  13-14. 

20  Ihid:  p.  15. 

^^Ibid:  pp.  21-22. 

22/fci(f;  pp.  13-14. 

23  Ibid:  pp.  16  and  27. 

^^Ibid:  36. 

25  Justice  I,  p.  126. 

26  What  is  Property,  pp.  249-250. 

27  Bougie,  pp.  220-221. 


126  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

ploitation  of  the  state,  and  the  glorification  of  the  police.^s  Even 
at  that  time  his  attitude  toward  anarchy  was  more  or  less  favor- 
able. Anarchy,  according  to  him,  is  rational  and  positive.^^  But 
as  a  form  of  government  it  is  ideal  instead  of  practical. ^°  Ulti- 
mately it  is  found  to  fall  into  a  state  of  perpetual  longing  for  the 
unattainable.^* 

Proudhon  then  concludes  that  both  the  regime  of  authority  and 
that  of  liberty  are  ideal  and  abstract  formulae.  They  are  the 
government  of  theory,  or  a  priori  government.  They  cannot  be 
realized  in  fact.^^  ^^le  government  of  fact  is  a  work  of  empir- 
icism. It  is  variable  to  the  infinite  degree,  and  is,  essentially 
and  without  any  exception,  a  composite  or  mixed  government.^^ 
Monarchy  and  democracy,  for  instance,  are  no  more  than  two 
ideals  furnished  by  the  theorists,  and  then  cannot  be  realized 
in  the  full  rigor  of  their  respective  terms.  In  the  most  auto- 
cratic state,  we  shall  always  find  the  democratic  element.  There 
is  no  king  without  subjects.  On  the  other  hand,  in  all  democracy 
the  autocratic  element  will  incessantly  appear.  There  is  always 
unity  of  power  in  the  state,  unity  in  each  organic  division.  In 
order  to  assure  the  unity  of  action  in  each  organ  we  often  indi- 
dividualize  and  functionalize  it.^^  Over  against  the  authoritative 
regime  and  the  liberal  regime  Proudhon  would,  therefore,  estab- 
lish the  regime  of  federation  which  tends  to  balance  authority 
and  liberty.^^ 

2s  Cont.  Eco.  II,  pp.  260-261. 

2»Du  Principe  Federatif,  p.  16. 

3«  "Ce  (the  sj'stem  based  upon  the  complete  negation  of  authority,  that 
is,  anarchy)  sonl  des  conceptions  ideals,  dcs  formules  abstraitcs,  d'apres 
lesqucUes  vont  se  constituer  empiriquement  et  d'intuition  tous  les  gouv- 
ernements  de  fait,  mais  elles-memes  ne  sauraient  passer  a  I'Etat  de  fait." 
Du  Principe  Federatif,  pp.  37-38. 

^^Ibid:  p.  29. 

^^Ibid:  p.  23. 

^^Ibid:  p.  30  (See  also  p.  38). 

34  Ibid:  p.  30.     Cont.  Pol.,  p.  89. 

35  In  some  places  Proudhon  seems  to  conceive  the  idea  that  federalism 
is  one  form  of  the  liberal  regime.  "In  theory  as  well  as  in  fact,  authority 
and  liberty  succeed  each  other  as  a  sort  of  polarisation,"  he  says.     "The 


I 


Theory  of  Federalism  127 

In  considering  his  theory  of  federation,  we  may,  for  the 
sake  of  clearness,  divide  it  into  five  parts,  (1)  geographical,  (2> 
political,  (3)  economic,  (4)  social  and  (5)  educational. 

(1)  Geographical. 

What  Proudhon  expected  to  establish  was  not  universal  feder- 
ation, but  the  federation  of  the  small  communities.  "Universal 
federation  would  end,"  he  says,  "in  the  stagnation  of  all  the  forces 
by  their  submission  to  a  common  authority.  The  federal  regime 
is  applicable  only  to  small  communities,  united  for  their  mutual 
defense  against  the  attack  of  the  great  states."  ^^  Proudhon's 
ideal  government,  therefore,  consists  of  medium-sized  groups, 
respectively  sovereign,  joined  by  a  pact  of  federation.^'^  Europe 
is  too  great  for  a  unified  confederation.  Europe  can  form  no 
more  than  a  confederation  of  confederations;  that  is  to  say,  a 
loose,  rather  than  a  strict,  confederation.  It  is  with  this  idea  in 
mind  that  Proudhon  suggested  the  following  plan  as  the  first  step 
— the  establishment  of  the  Itafian,  Greek,  Scandinavian  and 
Danubian  confederations,  preceded  by  the  decentralization  of 
the  great  states  and,  in  consequence,  their  general  disarmament.^^ 

In  applying  the  federal  principle  to  the  organization  of  France, 
Proudhon  would  divide  French  unity  into  thirty-six  sovereignties 
with  one  million  inhabitants  each  and  an  average  size  of  6,000 
square  kilometers.  He  would  reduce  the  power  of  each  of  the 
thirty-six  communities  to  certain  essential  attributes  fixed  by 
the  contract  of  federation.  Over  above  the  confederate  com- 
munities, there  would  be  a  supreme  council,  the  mandate  of  which 
would  in  each  community  protect  the  citizen  against  the  usurpa- 


authoritative  regime  retreats  before,  or  gives  concession  to,  the  liberal  or 
contractual  regime.  It  is  the  idea  of  contract  we  ought  to  consider  as 
the  dominant  idea  of  politics."  (Du  Principe  Federatif,  p.  44,  see  also 
pp.  41-42).  Here,  he  commits  the  error  of  contradiction  because  federal- 
ism means  the  balancing  of  authority  and  liberty;  but  the  regime  of 
liberty  is  directly  in  opposition  to  authority. 

38  "La  Guerre  et  la  Paix"  I,  314.    See  also  Principe  Federatif,  p.  58. 

2'^  Du  Principe  Federatif,  p.  58. 

^^Ibid:  p.  62. 


128  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

tion  of  power  by  the  local  government,  and  the  local  government 
against  the  insolence  of  factions.^^ 

(2)   Political. 

With  regard  to  the  political  conditions  in  the  federal  state, 
we  have  four  important  questions  to  consider:  (a)  What  would 
be  the  basis  of  federation?  (b)  what  would  be  the  position  of 
the  state?  (c)  how  would  the  government  be  organized?  and  (d) 
how  would  universal  suffrage  be  organized? 

(a)  What  would  be  the  basis  of  federation — the  contract? 

Federation  is  the  Latin  foedus,  that  is,  pact,  contract,  treaty, 
convention,  alliance,  etc.  It  is  a  convention  by  which  one  or 
more  chiefs  of  the  family,  one  or  more  communes,  one  or  more 
groups  of  communes  or  states,  are  reciprocally  and  equally  obli- 
gated to  each  other  for  one  or  more  particular  objects,  the 
direction  of  which  is  entrusted  exclusively  to  the  delegates  of  the 
federation.**' 

The  contract  in  the  federal  system  is  neither  a  contract  of 
pure  beneficence  of  the  prince  toward  his  subjects,  nor  a  fiction 
of  the  legalists  as  advocated  by  Rousseau."  It  would  be,  in  the 
first  place,  a  positive  and  effective  pact.  It  would  really  be  pro- 
posed, discussed,  voted,  adopted  and  then  modified  according  to 
the  wish  of  the  contractors.*^  jt  would  be,  in  the  second  place, 
reciprocal  and  commutative.^^.  The  chiefs  of  the  families,  com- 
munes, cantons,  provinces  or  states  would  be  reciprocally  and 
commutatively  obliged  to  each  other  by  the  contract.**  In  the 
third  place,  it  would  be  restricted  as  to  its  subjects,  to  certain 
limits.  It  could  not,  and  should  not  exact  from  the  contractors 
the  totality  of  their  efforts  and  leave  nothing  for  their  independ- 
ence.*^ In  the  fourth  place,  it  would  guarantee  the  liberty  of 
the  individual,  the  commune  and  the  state.    "Governmental  insti- 

8^  Capacite,  p.  276. 

*^  Du  Principe  Federatif,  p.  47. 

*i  Ibid:  p.  47. 

« Ibid:  pp.  47,  67-68. 

*^Ibid:  p.  46. 

**  Ibid:  p.  47. 

*^^Ibid:  pp.  46-48. 


Theory  of  Federalism  129 

tutions  .  .  .,"  said  Proudhon,  "should  be  based  upon  a  real 
contract  in  which  the  sovereignties  of  the  contracting  parties, 
instead  of  being  absorbed  in  a  central  majesty  altogether  personal 
and  mystic,  would  serve  as  a  positive  guarantee  for  the  liberty  of 
the  state,  the  commune  and  its  individuals.^®  Thus  the  contract 
would  reserve  for  the  individuals  a  participation  in  sovereignty 
and  in  action  greater  than  that  which  they  abandon.*'^  It  would 
also  guarantee  to  the  confederated  communities  their  territory 
and  sovereignty,  regulate  their  differences,  and  provide  by  general 
measures  for  all  that  concerns  the  security  and  prosperity  of  the 
commune.  The  attributes  of  the  federal  government  under  the 
contractual  regime  could,  therefore,  never  exceed  in  number  and 
in  reality  the  authorities  of  the  communes  or  provinces.** 

(b)   What  is  the  position  of  the  state? 

We  have  seen  in  the  preceding  chapter  that  in  1858  Proudhon 
considered  the  state  as  the  "chose  publiqite"  or  "res  puhltca"  *^ 
which  would  exist  in  the  regime  of  anarchy.  After  1863,  how- 
ever, his  idea  was  modified.  There  were  then  two  lines  of  thought 
in  his  theory  of  the  state:  (x)  The  distrust  of  the  state  and  (y) 
the  optimistic  view  of  the  state. 

(x)  The  distrust  of  the  state. 

In  1863  Proudhon's  idea  was  still  tinged  with  distrust  of  the 
state.  Instead  of  having  a  fixed  attitude  on  the  matter,,  he 
wavered  between  the  idea  of  utilizing  the  state  and  that  of  sup- 
pressing it.  He  then  believed  that  if  the  end  of  society  was  to 
do  away  with  the  state,  the  reason  for  its  existence  was  precisely 
because  it  would  satisfy  the  need  which  the  individual  outside  of 
the  state  would  satisfy  spontaneously  and  freely.^"  It  would 
be  quite  justifiable  for  the  collective  force  of  the  state  to  intervene 
in  the  creation  of  all  public  utiUties.^^    When  the  state  had,  how- 

*^  Capacite,  p.  163. 

*7  Du  Principe  Federatif,  pp.  46-47,  52. 

48  Ihid:  p.  48,  52-58. 

49  Justice  V,  p.  179. 
^  Fourniere,  p.  150. 

51  What  was  meant  by  him  here  was  that  state  intervention  was  state 
initiation,  direction  or  regulation  rather  than  state  control  of  public  utili- 
ties.   Du  Principe  Federatif,  pp.  78-79.    Capacite,  p.  79-80. 


130  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

ever,  given  to  us  what  we  had  expected  from  it,  and  had  ex- 
hausted its  virtue,  Proudhon  thought  that  it  ought  to  disappear. 
If  not,  it  would  cease  to  be  the  expression  of  progress.  "When, 
as  we  see  almost  everywhere  .  .  .,"  said  Proudhon,  "it  (the 
state)  fails  to  carry  on  the  services  which  it  has  created  and 
yields  to  the  temptation  of  monopoly,  it  is  no  longer  the  genius 
of  collectivity  which  fertilizes  it,  directs  it  and  enriches  it.  It 
then  becomes  a  vast  field  occupied  by  six  hundred  thousand 
employes  and  six  hundred  thousand  soldiers  .  .  .  who,  in- 
stead of  coming  to  the  aid  of  the  nation,  and  serving  the  citizens 
and  the  communes,  would  dispossess  and  oppress  them.  Soon  cor- 
ruption, fraud  and  laxity  would  creep  into  the  system.  All  of 
them  would  become  possessed  with  the  desire  of  maintaining  and 
augmenting  their  prerogatives,  of  multiplying  the  services  they 
receive  and  enlarging  their  budgets.  The  power  of  the  state, 
losing  sight  of  its  true  role,  would  fall  into  the  condition  of 
autocracy  and  stagnation.  .  .  The  nation,  going  astray  from 
its  historical  law,  would  begin  to  decay ."^^ 
(y)   The  optimistic  view  of  the  state. 

Proudhon  is,  however,  essentially  optimistic.  "Society  is  in 
continuous  progress,"  he  said.  "The  state  is  always  in  action 
because  it  has  new  needs  to  satisfy  and  new  questions  to  solve. 
It  is  the  expression  of  progress. "^^  He  then  saw  in  the  con- 
stitutions which  had  been  multiplied  by  the  nineteenth  century 
the  mark  of  a  new  era — an  era  wherein  the  organization  of  the 
nation  would  become  finally  conscious  of  itself.  He  praised  the 
treaty  of  1815,  not  only  because  it  had  established  equilibrium 
among  the  powers  of  Europe,  but  also  because  it  had  promised 
constitutional  guarantees  to  the  people.^^  He  therefore  believed 
that  the  state  in  the  future  would  not  be  the  product  of  organic 
nature,  but  the  product  of  the  intellectual  nature,  that  is,  the 
spirit.''^ 

52  Fourniere,  p.  152. 

53  Du  Principe  Federatif,  p.  56. 

54  Ibid:  p.  54. 
S5lbid:  p.  15. 


Theory  of  Federalism  131 

With  these  two  conflicting  ideas  in  his  mind,  Proudhon  would 
neither  aboHsh  the  state  nor  trust  it.  He  sought  to  utilize  it  on 
the  one  hand,  and  limit  its  functions  on  the  other.  The  state, 
according  to  his  idea,  should,  therefore,  have  the  right  of  legis- 
lation, of  initiation,  of  creation,  of  inauguration,  of  installation, 
but  not  the  right  of  execution.^^  Its  functions  should  be  greatly 
limited.  Roads,  canals,  tobacco,  posts,  telegraphs,  railways  and 
banks  should  be  left  to  the  public.  The  school  should  be  separated 
from  the  state.  Justice  too  should  not  be  considered  as  an 
attribute  of  the  central  authority.  The  militia,  the  arsenals, 
and  the  fortresses  should  be  controlled  by  the  local  authority. 
Only  in  time  of  war  should  they  be  turned  to  the  federal  gov- 
ernment.^"^ 

(c)   How  would  the  government  be  organized? 

The  basic  principle  of  federation  is  decentralization  or  local 
autonomy.  Proudhon  bitterly  attacked  the  system  of  central- 
ization. 

In  the  first  place,  centralization  is  the  vice  of  the  political 
system — vice  which  we  could  call  constitutional.^*  It  is  the 
castration  of  liberty.^^  In  a  centralized  government,  the  provinces 
and  cities  which  ought  to  enjoy  their  complete  autonomy,  are 
governed  and  administered,  not  by  themselves,  but  by  a  central 
authority  as  a  conquered  population.^"  The  attributes  of  the 
supreme  power  of  the  central  government  are  multiplied  and  ex- 
tended over  against  those  of  the  communes.^^  Nothing  is  done 
by  initiative,  by  spontaneity,  nor  by  the  independent  action  of 
the  individuals.  The  central  government  undertakes  all,  directs 
all,  regulates  all,  obstructs  all,  and  does  all,  without  encountering 
any  effective  resistance.^^     Hence  not  only  communal  and  pro- 


^6  Principe  Federatif,  p.  54. 
^''Ibid:  pp.  54-56. 
58  Cont.  Pol.,  p.  131. 
s^  Idee  Generale,  p.  280. 
60  Cont.  Pol.,  pp.  131-132. 
^1  Principe   Federatif,   p.   49. 
*2  Capacite,  pp.  351-352. 


132  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

vincial  liberty,  but  also  individual  and  national  liberty  are  de- 
stroyed by  tlie  central  government.^^ 

In  the  second  place,  political  centralization  has  as  its  principal 
corollary  mercantile  anarchy,  or  anarchistic  capitalism — that  is 
to  say,  the  negation  of  all  economic  right  and  of  all  social 
guarantees,  in  short,  of  all  mutuality.  So  far  as  governmental 
centraHzation  shows  itself  incompatible  with  the  liberty  of  '89, 
so  far  it  becomes  marvelously  reconciled  to  stock  jobbing  specula- 
tion, to  disorganization  among  the  producers  and,  above  all,  to  the 
organization  of  monopoly.^^ 

In  the  third  place,  centralization  is  simply  a  fiction.  What- 
ever the  form  of  the  centralized  government  may  be,  its  power 
always  is  a  constitutional  fiction,  never  a  complete  reality.  The 
reason  for  this  is  obvious.  All  organism  which  has  passed  beyond 
its  proper  limit  and  which  tries  to  invade,  or  annex  other  organ- 
isms, will  lose  in  power  what  it  gains  in  extent.  Soon  it  will  fall 
into  decay.  The  centralized  government  which  first  controls 
everything  will  end  in  disruption,  chiefly  because  of  its  absolutism, 
and  will  unavoidably  fall  into  the  abyss  of  anarchy .^^ 

For  the  idea  of  centralization,  Proudhon  substitutes  the  idea 
of  decentralization.  By  decentralization,  he  means,  first,  the 
diminution  of  the  power  of  the  central  government.  In  the  federal 
regime,  the  central  government  w^ould  consist  of  a  national  council 
and  a  central  executive  commission.  The  council  would  be 
formed  by  the  delegates  of  the  communities  who,  being  in  many 
cases  members  of  their  respective  community  governments,  will 
exercise  a  close  supervision  over  the  acts  of  the  federal  assem- 
bly.®^   The  members  of  the  council  would  choose,  in  their  turn, 

83  Principe  Federatif,  p.  49. 

8*  Capacite,  p.  291. 

esCont.  Pol.,  pp.  150-151. 

^®  Si  Ics  etats  confcderes  sont  egaux  entre  eux,  une  assemblee  unique 
suffit ;  s'ils  sont  d'une  importance  incgale,  on  retablit  I'equilibre  en  creant, 
pour  la  representation  federale,  deux  chambres  ou  conseils:  I'un  dont  les 
membres  ont  ete  nommes  en  nombre  egal  par  les  etats,  quelle  que  sclent 
leur  population  et  I'etendue  de  leur  territoire ;  I'autre  oij  les  deputes  sont 
nommes  par  les  memes  etats  proportionnellemcnt  a  leur  importance." 
Capacite,   p.    164. 


Theory  of  Federalism  133 

a  central  executive  commission.  This  commission  would  be 
superior  to  the  council  and  could  sustain  a  conflict  with  it  just 
as  if  it  were  the  elected  royalty  or  the  president  of  the  people.^^ 
The  central  government,  so  organized,  instead  of  absorbing  the 
federal  states  or  the  communal  and  municipal  authority,  would 
reduce  its  attributes  to  the  simple  role  of  general  initiative,  of 
mutual  guarantees,  and  of  general  supervision.  Its  decrees  would 
not  be  put  into  execution  unless  they  were  first  endorsed  by  the 
confederated  governments.^^ 

By  decentralization  Proudhon  meant,  in  the  second  place,  local 
autonomy  or  municipal  liberty.  In  the  federal  system,  the  com- 
mune would  be  essentially  sovereign.  It  would  have  the  right  of 
governing,  of  administering,  of  levying  taxes,  of  disposing  of 
its  properties  and  revenues,  of  creating  schools  for  its  youth, 
of  maintaining  police,  gendarmes  and  civil  guards,  of  nominating 
its  judges,  of  establishing  banks,  of  issuing  decrees  and  ordinances^ 
and  finally,  of  enacting  laws.  It  would  recognize  no  limitations 
except  those  of  its  own  choosing.  It  would  be  free  from  all 
coercion  from  outside.^^ 

(d)   How  would  universal  suffrage  be  organized? 

We  have  seen  in  the  preceding  chapter  that  Proudhon  ex- 
pected to  revolutionize  the  political  order  through  the  organiza- 
tion of  universal  suffrage.'^''  After  1863  he  believed  also  that 
universal  suffrage  would  form  the  basis  of  the  federated  com- 
munities.'^ "The  electoral  right,"  he  said,  "is  inherent  in  each 
individual  as  well  as  in  each  group  .  .  .  each  corporation 
each  commune,  each  city."'^^  ^  ^ust,  therefore,  be  direct.  It 
must  directly  represent  all  ideas,  all  opinions,  all  rights,  and  all 
interests  of  the  people."  Otherwise  it  would  be  indirect.  Proud- 
er Du  Principe  FecTeratif,  pp.  70-71.    See  also  Capacite,  pp.  144,  164,  225. 

68  Du  Principe  Federatif,  p.  58  (See  also  pp.  49  and  73). 

69  Capacite,  p.  231.    Cont.  Pol.  p.  142. 

70  Melange  III,  p.  48. 

71  Desjardin,  II,  p.  214. 

72  Capacite,  pp.  213  and  215. 

■'^Ihid:  p  217.     Cont.  Pol.,  pp.  190-191. 


134  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

hoii  then  strongly  opposed  the  pluraUty  of  candidacy.  "Will  you 
call  a  direct  vote  the  vote  given  by  10,000  communes,  differing  in 
customs,  territories  and  ideas,"  said  he,  "to  an  invididual  who  is 
strange  to  all  of  them  and  vv^ho  v^^ill  represent  them  only  from 
the  point  of  view  of  transitory  sentiment,  or  from  casual 
fancy."'^'*  In  the  system  of  direct  universal  suffrage,  the  basis 
of  representation  would  be  not  only  population,  but  also  territory, 
property ,_  capital,  industry  and  the  natural  religious  and  com- 
munal groups.     No  group  would  be  excluded  from  it.'^^ 

(3)  Economic:  Mutualism  and  agricultural  and  industrial 
federation. 

The  basic  principle  of  Proudhon's  economic  theory  was 
mutualism.'*'  The  French  words  mutual,  nmtualiie,  mutilation, 
which  have  for  synonyms  reciproque,  or  reciprocite,  comes  from 
the  Latin  word  mutuum,  which  signifies  in  a  large  sense  ex- 
change.^" 

Human  nature,  according  to  the  mutualists,  is  the  highest 
expression,  if  not  the  incarnation,  of  universal  justice.  Man  gets 
his  rights  directly  from  the  dignity  of  his  nature  just  as  later 
he  achieves  his  well-being  directly  from  his  personal  work  and 
the  free  exercise  of  his  talents  and  virtues.  The  state  is  nothing 
more  than  the  union  freely  formed,  of  equal  and  independent 
subjects.  It  represents  only  liberties  and  interests  of  the  people. 
There  should  be  no  other  prerogative  than  that  of  liberty,  no 
other  supremacy  than  that  of  right.  Society,  therefore,  must 
be  considered,  not  as  a  hierarchy  of  functions  and  faculties,  but 
as  a  system  of  equilibrium  between  free  forces,  in  which  each  is 
assured  the  enjoyment  of  the  same  rights  as  the  others  and 
after  having  fulfilled  the  same  duties,  of  the  same  advantages  in 
exchange  for  the  same  services — a  system,  essentially  based  upon 
equality  and  liberty,  which  would  exclude  all  distinction  of  for- 


^*  Capacite,  p.  217. 
"  Cont.  Pol.,  p.  189. 

'8  He  had  vaguely  formulated  the  theory  of  mutualism  in  1846.     Cont. 
Eco.  II,  pp.  412-416. 
'^  Capacite,  p.  68. 


Theory  of  Federalism  135 

tune,  of  rank  and  of  class.  Authority  and  charity  would  dis- 
appear.   Justice  would  become  the  dominant  idea  of  society.^® 

Mutualism  is  the  formula  of  justice  by  virtue  of  which  all 
the  members  of  society,  be  they  corporations  or  individuals, 
families  or  cities,  manufacturers,  agriculturists  or  public  func- 
tionaries, would  reciprocally  promise  and  guarantee  to  each  other, 
service  for  service,  credit  for  credit,  security  for  security,  value 
for  value,  information  for  information,  good  faith  for 
good  faith,  truth  for  truth,  liberty  for  liberty,  and  property  for 
property.'^^  Hence  all  the  institutions  of  mutualism,  mutual 
assurance,  mutual  credit,  mutual  help,  mutual  instruction,  recip- 
rocal guarantees  of  market,  of  exchange  and  of  work,  etc.^" 

In  order  to  carry  out  his  principle  of  mutualism  more  effect- 
ively, Proudhon  urged  the  formation  of  an  agricultural  and  in- 
dustrial federation.  The  different  industries  must  understand 
that  they  are  sisters,  that  their  interests  are  closely  allied  with 
each  other  and  that  one  cannot  escape  when  the  others  are  suffer- 
ing. They  should  therefore  unite  themselves  into  a  federation, 
not  for  the  purpose  of  absorbing  each  other,  but  for  the  purpose 
of  mutually  guaranteeing  the  conditions  of  property  which  are 
common  to  all  and  the  monopoly  of  which  no  one  can  claim.^^ 
They  should  form  a  network  of  unions,  of  associations  for  the 
reciprocal  protection  of  industry  and  commerce,  for  the  con- 
struction of  canals,  roads,  railways,  and  finally  for  the  organ- 


■^^  Capacite,  pp.  69-71. 

^9  Capacite,  p.   151. 

^^Ibid:  pp.  69-71.  Mutualism  is  for  Proudhon,  not  only  an  economic 
principle.  It  is  a  principle  of  the  state,  a  law  of  the  state,  or  rather  a 
religion  of  the  state.  (Capacite,  pp.  69-71).  "What  we  call  in  particular 
the  pact  of  guarantee  between  the  states  is  nothing  more  than  one  of  the 
most  brilliant  applications  of  the  idea  of  mutuality,"  said  Proudhon, 
"which  in  politics  becomes  the  idea  of  federation."  (Capacite,  pp.  351-352). 
If  we  apply  the  principle  of  mutualism  in  the  field  of  poHtics,  we  should 
soon  see  that  the  government  is  no  longer  sovereign.  (Capacite,  pp. 
69-71.)  It  is  the  people  that  is  sovereign,  here  would  be  no  centraliza- 
tion but  local  autonomy   (Capacite,  p.  155). 

81  Du  Principe  Federatif,  p.  113. 


136  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

ization  of  credit  and  insurance.^-  Through  the  formation  of  the 
federation,  they  should  protect  the  contracting  nations  from 
bankruptcy,  and  from  capitaHstic  exploitation  both  from  without 
and  within.^^  Then,  and  only  then,  would  they  approach  equal- 
ity.84 

(4)   Social. 

Society  consists  mainly  of  two  classes :  the  bourgeoisie  and 
the  plebeians.  The  bourgeoisie  may  be  divided  into  two  sub- 
divisions :  the  "haute  bourgeoisie,"  or  industrial  feudality,^'''  and 
the  "petite  bourgeoisie,"  or  "classe  moyenne."  ^^  The  first  division 
consists  of  those  who  live  on  the  rent  of  their  land  or  houses, 
on  the  interest  of  their  investments  and  on  the  profit  of  their 
enterprises ;  the  second  consists  of  two  distinct  groups  of  people : 
(1)  Small  manufacturers,  artisans,  shopkeepers,  and  fanners, 
and  (2)  workers  or  employees  whose  incomes  exceeds  in  certain 
instances  the  average  income  of  the  common  people."^'^ 

For  the  "haute  bourgeoisie"  Proudhon  had  no  sympathy. 
Economically,  he  held,  they  do  not  produce  anything  themselves. 
They  live  on  the  work  of  others^^  and  are  bound  to  ultimately 
lead  us  to  economic  disaster,  to  mercantile  and  industrial  anarchy 
and  to  the  feudality  of  capital.^^  PoUtically  they  favor,  first, 
administrative  centralization,  because  it  puts  them  in  possession 
of  power  and  enables  them  to  exploit  the  masses.  Second,  they 
favor  the  separation  of  powers  because  it  assists  them  to  balance 
the  influence  of  the  crown  and  to  frustrate  the  personal  politics 
of  the  prince.  Thirdly,  they  favor  privileged  suffrage  because 
it  suppresses  the  aspiration  of  the  plebeians  and  restricts  the 
political  right  to  a  group  of  qualified  electors.  "Under  a  regime 
of   administrative   centralization  and  privileged  suffrage,"   said 

82  Principe  Federatif,  p.  110. 

83  Du  Principe  Federatif,  p.  111. 

84  Ibid:  p.  80. 

85  Capacite,  p.  179. 
^^Ibid:  p.  178. 

87  Justice  II,  pp.  6  and  159. 

88  Capacite,  pp.  160-161. 
^^Ibid:  p.  227. 


Theory  of  Federalism  137 

Proudhon,  "the  bourgeoisie  through  their  majority  became  the 
master  of  the  government;  all  local  life  became  annihilated;  and 
all  agitation  easily  suppressed.  Under  such  a  regime,  I  say,  the 
working  class,  shut  up  in  their  workshops,  are  naturally  doomed 
to  slavery.  Liberty  exists,  but  only  in  the  sphere  of  the  bour- 
geoisie society."-"'  In  short,  the  government  under  such  a  regime 
is  a  government  for  the  upper  bourgeoisie.^^  After  having 
passed  from  political  catastrophe  to  political  catastrophe  and  de- 
generated to  the  last  degree  of  moral  and  intellectual  emptiness, 
this  element  of  the  bourgeoisie  becomes  dissolved  into  a  debased 
mass  which  has  nothing  human  except  its  egoism.^^  It  is  de- 
finitely doomed.    We  are  witnessing  its  moral  death.^^ 

As  to  the  "petite  bourgeoisie,"  or  the  middle  class,  their  fate  is 
no  more  enviable.  Attacked  in  the  front  by  the  rise  of  the  work- 
ingmen,  and  upon  the  flanks  by  taxation  and  competition  or  free 
exchange,  the  middle  class  is  going  to  be  diminished  day  by  day 
until  it  degenerates  into  the  proletarian  class.^^ 

It  is  quite  natural  for  us  to  suspect  that  Proudhon  might 
appeal  to  violence  for  the  accomplishment  of  the  social  revolution. 
But  after  a  careful  study  of  his  work,  we  see  that  he  is  absolutely 
opposed  to  such  procedure.  "Far  from  me,"  said  he,  "all  fer- 
ment of  hatred  and  of  civil  war.  It  is  well  enough  known  that 
I  am  not  what  is  called  'a  man  of  action.'  "  ^^  The  law  of  1864 
granted  to  the  workingmen  the  liberty  of  union  and  of  strike. 
Proudhon  denounced  it  as  being  anti-juristic,  anti-economic,  and 
contrary  to  all  society,  and  to  all  order.®^  ^^^ 

The   social   revolution,   according  to  him,  would  assume  a 
character  peculiar  to  itself.     It  would  no  longer  be  a  question 
of  combat  between  the  bourgeoisie  and  the  proletariat,  wherein^ 
the  latter  would  be  the  conqueror,  but  a  question  of  searching 

^  Principe  Federatif,  pp.  35-36. 

91  Capacite,  pp.  171-173. 

92  Ibid:  p.  179. 
9^  Ibid:  p.  169. 
9*md:  p.  178. 
»5  76id:  p.  185. 

96/fcid:  pp.  331-346.     See  also  Bougie,  p.  308. 


138  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

for  an  equilibrium  between  the  classes,  or  rather  of  a  fusion  of 
all  of  the  antagonistic  classes  into  one  middle  class.    The  actual 
distinction  between  the  bourgeoisie  and  the  proletariat  is  simply 
a   revolutionary  accident.        "Both,"  said  Proudhon,   "must  be^ 
reciprocally  blended  into  a  higher  consciousness."^'^ 

After  the  social  revolution,  the  worker  would  no  longer  be 
a  serf  of  the  state.  He  would  be  a  man  positively  and  effectively 
sovereign,  acting  upon  his  proper  initiative  and  his  personal  re- 
sponsibility.*^^ He  would  be  sovereign  in  the  truly  charitable 
society;  in  the  chamber  of  commerce;  in  the  corporation  of  art 
and  trade;  in  the  society  of  the  workers;  in  the  exchange;  in 
the  market;  in  the  academies;  in  the  schools;  in  the  agricultural 
societies ;  in  the  electoral  conventions ;  in  the  parliamentary  as- 
semblies ;  in  the  council  of  state ;  in  the  national  guard ;  and  even 
in  the  church  and  in  the  temple.^'* 

(5)  Educational. 

With  federation  education  would  become  universal.  Superior 
instruction  would  be  given  to  all  the  people.^""  From  the  day 
of  their  birth  up  to  the  age  of  seven  or  eight,  all  the  educational 
expenses  of  the  children  would  be  provided  by  their  parents. 
From  the  age  of  seven  or  eight  to  that  of  eighteen  the  education 
of  youth  would  be  continued  either  by  the  parents  themselves, 
a  domicile,  if  such  were  their  choice,  or  in  any  particular  school 
instituted  and  directed  by  them  at  their  own  expense  if  they  did 
not  like  to  trust  their  children  to  the  public  schools.     Thus  the 

°^  Capacite,  p.  51.    See  also  Theoric  de  la  Propriete,  p.  180. 

^8  Capacite,  pp.  69-71. 

^^  Ibid,  pp.  163-164.  Of  this  work,  the  full  title  of  which  is  "De 
la  Capacite  politique  des  classes  Ouvriercs,"  Chaudey  wrote  the  last 
chapter  for  Proudhon.  He  believed  that  the  interests  of  the  workers 
were  distinct  from  those  of  the  bourgeoisie.  Politics  is  not  a  matter  of 
sentiment.  It  is  fundamentally  the  legal  struggle  of  (class)  interests. 
(Capacite,  p.  349).  It  is,  therefore,  nothing  more  than  natural  that  the 
working-men  should  consider  the  bourgeoisie  their  adversary.  The  social 
revolution  will  be  accomplished  when  the  workingmen  will  ally  them- 
selves with  the  enlightened,  active  and  capable  bourgeoisie  against  the 
insolent  capitalistic  bourgeoisie.     (Capacite,  p.  355.) 

100  Du  Principe  Federatif,  p.  239. 


Theory  of  Federalism  139 

greatest  liberty  would  be  left  to  the  parents  and  to  the  communes. 
The  state  would  intervene  only  as  an  auxiliary  when  the  family 
and  the  commune  needed  its  assistance.  In  the  school  of  the 
state,  professional  instruction  would  be  combined  with  scientific 
and  literary  instruction.  In  consequence,  the  young  people  at 
the  age  of  nineteen  or  more  would  be  compelled  to  do  useful 
and  productive  manual  work.  The  cost  of  education  would  be 
defrayed  by  returns  from  their  products.^"^ 


101  Capacite,  pp.  287-288. 


CHAPTER  VIII 
Conclusion 

(1)   Proudhon's  theory  of  nationalism  and  patriotism. 

^  This  essay  would  be  incomplete  if  we  did  not  consider  Proud- 
hon's idea  of  nationalism  and  patriotism.  From  1840  to  1861, 
he  had  no  definite  idea  about  the  position  of  the  state.  At  first 
he  desired  to  abolish  it  completely,  but  later  he  decided  it  was 
best  to  retain  it  in  a  changed  form.^  After  1862,  his  idea  became 
clearer  and  more  cautious.  He  urged  the  establishment  of  a 
federation  of  small  states. 
' —  The  perfection  of  the  little  autonomous  spheres  which  the 
Greek  cities  had  manifested  did  not  cease  to  excite  his  admir- 
ation.2  What  he  opposed  strongly  at  that  time  was  the  large 
unified  state.  He  opposed  the  unification  of  Italy  because  it 
would  create  a  strong  military  force,  break  the  established  equi- 
librium of  Europe,  and  provoke  in  the  neighboring  states  agita- 
tions which  would  terminate  in  the  rearrangement  of  the  political 
map  of  Europe.^ 

Still  more  significant  is  his  idea  relative  to  patriotism.  As  a 
theorist,  he  entertained  no  special  patriotic  feeling  toward  France. 
"Where  one  finds  justice,  there  is  his  country,"  says  he,  "Poor 
France,  apostate  on  18  Brumaire,  apostate  on  December  2,  1851, 
insolent  against  its  constitutional  kings,  rampant  with  despots, 
without  principle,  without  dignity,  without  conscience.  .  .  If 
I  were  only  twenty-five  years  old,  I  would  go  to  America;  if  I 
were  thirty-five  years  old  I  would  ask  my  naturalization  in  Bel- 
gium." •*     Proudhon  was  after  all  a  Frenchman  at  heart.     He 

1  See  Chap.  VI. 

2  Bougie,  p.  253. 

3  Desjardin  II,  p.  53.    Bougie,  pp.  249,  250,  253. 
*Corresp.   IV,  pp.  255-256    (1860). 


Influence  of  Proudhon's  Work  141 

loved  France  as  the  country  of  those  who  sing  eternal  revolution. 
In  spite  of  all  the  forms  of  slavery  that  exist  within  it,  there  is 
no  place  in  the  world,  he  maintained,  where  the  spirit  is  so  free 
as  in  France.^  The  absence  of  patriotic  sentiment  in  the  French- 
man was  to  Proudhon  a  monstrosity.® 

(2)  Proudhon's  influence  upon  anarchism,  social  radicalism 
and  syndicalism. 

It  is  needless  to  say  that  with  the  exception  of  William  God-  "S 
win,'^  Proudhon  ranks  as  the  first  expositor  of  anarchism.^  Social 
radicalism,  which  endeavors  to  reaUze  justice  and  social  peace, 
and  transform  political  democracy  into  social  democracy,  has  also 
been  greatly  influenced  by  him.^  But  still  greater  is  his  influence 
upon  syndicalism.  ''La  Capacite  politique  des  classes  Ouvrieres," 
says  Bougie,  "is  the  gospel  of  syndicalism."^*'  The  syndicalists'"^ 
derive  their  theory  of  economic  federalism  chiefly  from  hmi}r 

(3)  Criticism  of  Proudhon's  work. 

Intellectually,  Proudhon  was  fearless.  He  attacked  the  state,---^ 
government  and  all  the  other  institutions  of  society.  He  de^ 
nounced  the  theory  of  Rousseau,  that  of  the  traditionalists  and 
of  the  Utopian  socialists.  He  was  the  friend  of  no  one,  and  the 
enemy  of  all.  In  short,  he  was  Proudhon  himself.  He  knew  no 
authority  except  his  own. 

5  Revolution  Sociale,  p.  280.     See  also  Melange  III,  p.  2)2>. 
^  Capacite,  p.  41. 

7  William  Godwin  (1756-1836)  published  his  famous  book  "Enquiry 
concerning  political  justice"  in  1793.  For  a  brief  view  of  his  life  and  his 
idea,  see  Paul's  "William  Godwin,  his  friends  and  contemporaries,"  and 
Stephen's  "Enghsh  Thought  in  the  Eighteenth  Century." 

8  For  Proudhon's  influence  upon  the  individual  anarchists  of  the 
United  States,  see  Osgood,  "Scientific  Anarchism,"  pp.  18-25. 

^  For  a  general  idea  of  social  radicalism,  see  Brouilhet,  "Le  Conflit 
des  Doctrines,"  Book  II,  pp.  71-167. 

1°  Bougie,  Avant-propos,  p.  VI. 

11  G.  Weill,  "Mouvement  social  en  France,"  Ch.  II,  pp.  36-42.  Louis 
Levine  "Syndicalism  in  France,  Ch.  V-VI,  Passim.  For  further  detail, 
see  M.  G.  Pirau's  "Proudhonisme  et  Syndicahsme  Revolutionnaire,"  Paris, 
Rousseau  (1910). 


! 


142  The  Political  Theories  of  P,  J.  Proudhon 

There  are  three  chief  weaknesses  injiis  writings.  In  the  first 
place,  he  constantly  changed  his  ideas.  Even  in  the  use  of  terms 
he  often  fell  into  the  abyss  of  confusion.  He  used,  for  instance, 
the  word  "republic"  in  two  senses.  In  one  place  he  condemned 
it  as  monarchy  without  a  monarch.^-  In  another  place  he  hailed 
it  as  the  ideal  form  of  anarchy.^^  "^  thesecond  place  his  ideas 
are   destructive    rather   than   constructive^>  He   was   strong  in 

y  critical  analysis,  and  weak  in  dogmatic  exposition.  In  order  to 
I  convince  ourselves  of  this  fact,  it  will  only  be  necessary  for  us 
\  to  read  his  first  memoir  on  property.  No  one  more  effectively 
than  he  assailed  all  the  existing  systems  of  society;  no  one  has 
with  the  same  vigor  put  the  lawyers  and  the  economists  under 
foot.  But  when  he  came  to  reveal  to  us  his  constructive  plan, 
he  was  decidedly  inferior  to  all  those  whom  he  seemed  to  domi- 
nate.   He  stammered,  he  lisped.    His  idea  became  at  once  vague 

'•.  and  even  incomprehensible.  "S^n  the  third  place,  he  was  essentially 

^  a  man  of  theory  rather  than  of  action^  What  he  tried  to  accom- 
plish was  ideal,  Utopian  rather  than  practical,)' 

In  general,  he  had  great  confidence  in  the  indefinite  perfect- 

-•>  ibility  of  the  individual  and  of  mankind.^*  But  on  many  occasions 
his  temper  became  violent.  He  condemned  the  people  generally 
as  the  most  barbarous  and,  consequently,  the  most  retrograded 
of  society.^^  He  criticized  the  French  people  with  particular 
bitterness.  In  one  place  he  said,  "She  (France)  has  no  more 
intelligence,  no  more  moral  conscience.  She  has  lost  even  the 
notion  of  morality."^®  In  another  place  he  says,  "The  people  are 
apathetic,  the  youth  epicurean  and  immoral;  all  the  nation  care- 
less  and   sluggish.     I   don't  know   what  will   happen.      Will  a 

■*•    hurricane  fall  upon  France?    I  do  not  know,  I  do  not  care."^'^ 

12  "Democratic  ou  Republique,  n'cst  que  une  monarchic  sans  monarque." 
Revolution  Sociale,  p.  49. 

13  Melange  II,  pp.  12-13. 

1*  Idee  Generalc,  p.  281.     See  also  Justice  I,  pp.  131-132.  Cont.  Pol., 
pp.  86-87. 

15  Corresp.  IV,  p.  132.    Justice  VI,  p.  269. 

i«  Justice  I,  p.  70. 

"St.  Beuve,  p.  248  (letter  to  his  friend,  April  24,  1841). 


Defects  of  Proudhon's  Work  143 

In  spite  of  all  these  accusations  and  denunciations,  Proudhon 
before  1861  was  quite  confident  about  the  progress  of  mankind 
and  the  triumph  of  the  revolution.^^c3ut  the  more  he  became 
experienced,  the  more  he  became  convinced  of  the  fact  that  what 
he  had  cherished  as  the  ideal  form  of  society,  that  is,  anarchy, 
could  not  be  realized^  In  1862  he  wrote  to  his  friend,  "The  public^ 
order  is  based  upon  the  liberty  and  the  conscience  of  the  citizen ; 
anarchy,  the  absence  of  all  authority,  is  the  correlative  of  the 
highest  social  virtue,  and,  consequently,  the  ideal  of  mankind. 
We  have  not  yet  arrived  at  that  stage.  Centuries  and  centuries 
will  pass  before  the  idea  of  anarchy  will  be  realized."^^ 

Proudhon  knew  perfectly  well  that  in  a  given  society,  authority 
of  man  over  man  is  inversely  proportional  to  the  stage  of  intel- 
lectual development  which  that  society  has  reached.^*^  As  long 
as  human  nature  remains  what  it  was  as  condemned  by  him, 
Proudhon's  dream  of  anarchy,  ofji  revolutionary  Utopia,  will  re- 
main always  a  Utopia,  a  dream.  "C^nd  in  1863,  Proudhon  realized 
that  his  anarchistic  idea  was  after  all  simply  a  dream^ 


isCorresp.  Ill,  p.  386  (1843)  ;  IV.,  p.  149;  V.,  pp.  247-249  (1853). 

19  Letter  of  Nov.  2,  1862. 

2«  What  is  Property,  pp.  263-264. 


,^  APPENDIX 

^  (1)   Proudhon's   Life. 

1809  (Jan.  15)  Born  at  Besangon. 

1816-1820  Cowherd. 

1820  Cellar-boy  in  an  inn. 

1820-1822  Studied  in  the  college  of  Besancon.f"^^/i^^k      , 

1827-1830  Worked   for   Gauthier  Company  in  BesanQon, 

first  as  proof-reader,  then  as  compositor.to  cLftU/»^'^ 

1830-1831  Travelled   in    France   on    foot    from    Paris    to 

,^oAJ^  //,  Lyons,  from  Lyons  to  Marseilles,  and  obtained 
P"^  i>>^  employment    in    Neufchatel,    Lyons,    Marseilles 

and  Draguignan. 

1832  As  an  overseer  of  printing  {prote)  in  the  com- 

pany of  Gauthier  in  Besangon. 

1836  Established  a  printing  office  of  his  own  with 

the  aid  of  a  friend.     Completely  failed. 

1838  The   publication   of   his   "Essai   de   grammaire 

generale"  secured  him  a  triennial  pension  of 
1,500  francs  from  the  Academy  of  Besangon, 
known  as  the  Suard  Pension.  At  the  end  of 
this  year  he  moved  to  Paris. 

1840  The  publication  of  "Ou'est  ce  que  la  Propri- 
ete?"  The  result  of  this  publication  was  the 
withdrawal  of  his  pension  by  the  Academy  of 
BesanQon  because  of  his  noxious  opinions. 

1841  (Jan.)  He   became  a  collaborator  of   M.  Turbat  and 

worked  upon  the  problem  of  reformatories — 
"preventive  prisons." 


\ 


Appendix  145 

1842  His  third  memoir  on  Property  "Avertissement 

aux  Proprietaires"  was  published.  As  a  result 
of  this  publication  he  was  prosecuted  before 
the  cour  d'assises  of  Besangon,  but  succeeded 
in  obtaining  his  acquittal. 

1844-1847  Transportation  agent  at  Lyons  for  the  steam- 

boat company  of  Mm.  Gauthier  Brothers. 

1848  At  the  outbreak  of  the  revolution  of  February  rt*-*; 
he  went  to  Paris.  On  June  4  of  the  same  year,  t^  -a)^ 
he  was  elected  to  the  Constitutional  Assembly  \  ^; ' 
as  representative  of  the  Department  of  Seine.  1^  jjiA 

1849  He  established  the  People's  Bank.     Being  con-»>'^v«,*^*', 
demned  to  three  years'  imprisonment,  he  was   ^^a 
obliged  to  give  up  his  enterprise.    On  June  26th  ^^ 
and  27th  of  the  same  year,  he  published  two    uv^ 
articles  bitterly  attacking  Louis  Napoleon.    He     \^ 
was   consequently  summoned  to   the   court  of 
assizes  and  sentenced  to  three  years'  imprison- 
ment and  fined  3,000  francs.     In  the  prison  he 
married  Mile.  Euphrasie  Piegard,  a  lace-maker 
(Desjardin  I,pp.  142-143). 

1849-1852  Three  years'  imprisonment. 

1852  He  was  set  at  liberty. 

1858  Publication  of  "De  la  Justice  dans  la  Revolution 

et  dans  I'Eglise,"  and  a  pamphlet  "Petition  to 
the  Senate."  He  was  declared  guilty  of  five 
misdemeanors  in  the  book  and  two  misde- 
meanors in  the  pamphlet  and  sentenced  to 
three  years'  imprisonment  and  fined  4,000 
francs. 

1858-1862  Exile  in  Belgium. 

1862  Returned  to  Paris  after  the  enactment  of  the 

special  imperial  act  of  1860,  supplementing  the 
Amnesty  of  1859. 

1865  (Jan.  16)     Died  at  Passy,  Paris. 


146  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

(2)    Proudhon's    theory   of   logic. 

Proudhon's  theory  of  logic  passed  through  three  stages  of 
development:  (a)  The  law  of  series  (1843),  (b)  the  theory  of 
antinomy  ended  in  fusion  (1846),  and  (c)  the  theory  of  antinomy 
ended  in  equilibrium  (1858). 

(a)  The  law  of  series   (1843). 

In  1843,  Proudhon  formulated  a  new  logic — the  law  of  series 
against  the  law  of  syllogism  and  Bacon's  law  of  induction.^ 
According  to  him,  any  Judgment  which  is  not  based  upon  a  regu- 
lar series  is  necessarily  a  false  judgment.^  The  series  has  as  its 
prime  element  unity  (I'unite).  The  former  is  the  antitehsis  of 
the  latter.  The  smallest  series  contains  at  least  two  unities,  a 
thesis  and  an  antithesis,  a  coming  and  a  going,  the  opposites,  the 
extremes,  the  polarity,  the  equilibrium,  the  good  and  the  evil, 
the  yes  and  the  no,  the  me  and  the  non-me.^  These  two  unities 
may  stand  in  the  same  relation  of  identity  as  the  teeth  of  a  saw ; 
in  the  same  relation  of  progression  as  that  of  ten,  one  hundred, 
and  one  thousand;  or  in  the  same  relation  of  analogy  as  that  of 
tune  and  color ;  and,  finally,  in  the  same  relation  of  composition 
as  that  of  the  different  parts  of  a  table,  a  statue,  or  a  machine,  etc. 

The  relation  of  unities  is  what  we  call  the  law  of  the  series.* 
Here  we  may  notice  that  in  the  law  of  series,  the  idea  of  con- 
tradiction is  vaguely  hinted  at,  but  not  very  definitely  developed.^ 

(b)  The  theory  of  antinomy  ended  in  fusion  (1846). 

In  writing  his  "Sysieme  dcs  Contradictions  Economiques," 
Proudhon  adopted  the  theory  of  antinomy  from  Hegel,  whose 
works,  curiously  enough,  he  had  never  read.«    It  was  only  through 

1  Dichl,  pp.   155-156. 

2  De  la  Creation,  p.  94. 

3  Ibid:  p.  125. 
*Ibid:  p.  128. 

5  Proudhon  borrowed  his  idea  from  Fourier.  But  to  Proudhon  the 
law  of  series  is  essentially  a  method  of  dialectic,  of  logic;  to  Fourier,  it  is 
rather  a  theory  of  social  philosophy  for  the  organization  and  develop- 
ment of  social  life.    Diehl,  p.  159.     (See  also  De  la  Creation,  p.  120.) 

sCorresp.  II,  p.  176.  His  letter  to  Bergmann,  Jan.  19,  1845,  and  to 
M.  Tissot,  Dec.  13.  1846. 


Appendix  147 

his  friendly  conversation  in  Paris  with  Karl  Marx'^  in  1844  and 
with  Karl  Grun  ^  in  1844-1845  that  he  happened  to  know  the 
principles  of  Hegelian  logic.^ 

Hegel's  theory  of  antinomy,  as  formulated  in  his  logic,  is  as 
follows:  All  development  in  life  as  well  as  in  philosophy  rests 
upon  contradictions,  that  is,  upon  the  existence  of  two  laws  or 
two  tendencies  which  are  opposed  to  each  other ;  not  only  between 
two  things,  but  also  within  one  and  the  same  thing.  If  we  think 
logically,  we  must  search  for  the  contradictions.  The  logical 
method  consists  of  three  parts,  thesis,  antithesis  and  synthesis. 
The  first  is  the  opposite  of  the  second.  Between  these  two  ideas, 
there  arises  a  third  idea,  which  is  higher  than  the  two  and 
which  reconciles  them.''' 

Proudhon  rather  faithfully  followed  Hegel's  idea  in  his 
"Systeme  des  Contradictions  Economiques."  It  was  for  him  the 
best  means  of  obtaining  the  truth,  the  absolute  or  mathematical 
certainty.  He  did  not,  however,  obtain  the  result  he  searched  for. 
The  social  question  he  tried  to  deal  with  was  often  too  compli- 
cated to  fall  within  his  inflexible  system.  He  was  obliged  to  force 
his  ideas  to  fit  into  his  narrow  and  artificial  frame. 

In  this  connection,  Karl  Marx's  criticism  about  his  idea  is 
particularly  significant.  "The  author  of  economic  contradictions," 
said  he,  "believes  that  he  has  made  the  HegeHan  dialectic  actually 

^  "C'est  moi  qui  suis  responsable  de  la  sophistication  de  Proudhon, 
c'est  moi  qui  I'ai  infecte  d'hegelianisme."  Karl  Marx:  "La  misere  de  la 
philosophic,"  p.  181. 

8  Die  grosse  und  erbahene  Arbeit  Kegels  im  absoluten  Freiheit  und 
Notwendigkeit  ineinander  aufgehen  zu  lassen,  das  Problem  der  ISIenschheit 
wenigstens  gestellt  zu  haben  dass  meine  Natur  zugleich  mein  Werk  sein 
muss,  diesse  kolossale  Wahrheit  ...  hat  Proudhon  vollstandig  begriffen. 
Nur  von  der  Auflosung  der  deutschen  Philosophic  selbst  durch  die  Kritik, 
von  der  Vernichtung  aller  philosophischer  Systematik  hatte  er  noch  keine 
geschichtliche  Kenntnis.  Ich  hatte  das  uncndliche  Vergniigen,  gewisser- 
massen  der  Privatdozent  des  Mannes  zu  wrden,  dessen  Scharfsinn  seit 
Lessing  und  Kant  viellcicht  noch  nicht  iiberhalt  wurde."  Griin  "Die 
soziale  Bcwegung  in  Frankreich  und  Belgien." 

9  Diehl,  p.  166. 

10  Hegel's  Werke.     Bd.,  V.,   pp.  327-353. 


148  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

function.  In  reality,  he  has  deformed  and  falsified  it.  Once 
putting  in  balance  the  advantages  and  inconveniences  of  an 
economic  principle — division  of  work  or  competition — the  problem 
for  him  to  deal  with  is  to  conserve  the  latter,  and  eliminate  the 
former.  He  is  eclectic  rather  than  Hegelian.  And  he  is  eclectic 
because  he  takes  an  intermediate  position  between  the  two  op- 
posing classes.     His  mentality  is  that  of  a  petit  bourgeois-"  ^^ 

(c)  The  theory  of  antinomy  ended  in  equilibrium  (1858). 

While  in  his  "Systeme  des  Contradiction  Economiques" 
Proudhon  considered  synthesis  as  the  fusion  of  thesis  and  anti- 
thesis, in  "De  la  Justice  dans  la  Revolution  et  dans  I'Eglise,"  he 
saw  that  the  antinomical  terms  did  not  cancel  each  other  any 
more  than  the  opposite  poles  of  an  electric  pile  destroy  each 
other,  that  they  were  the  procreative  causes  of  motion,  life  and 
progress,  and  that  the  problem  for  us  to  solve  was  to  discover, 
not  their  fusion  which  would  be  their  death,  but  their  equilibrium, 
an  equilibrium  for  ever  unstable,  var}dng  with  the  development 
of  society.^^ 


"  Karl  Marx  "La  Misere  de  la  Philosophic,"  p.  181. 
"Justice  I,  pp.  3  and  179. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

(1)   General  Works 

A.  Bebel,  "Charles  Fourier,"  Stuttgart,  1888. 

A.  Beauchrey,  "ficonomie  Sociale  de  P.  J.  Proudhon,"  Paris,  1867. 

L.  Blanc,  "Organizateur  de  Travail,"  Paris,   1848. 

Bonald,  (a)  "Oeuvres,"  Paris  1817-1819  (11  vols.) 

Vol.  I  "L'Essai  Analytique  sur  les  Lois  Naturelles  de  I'Ordre 

Social,"  or  "Du  Pouvoir  du  Ministre  et  du  Suject  dans  la 

Societe." 

Vol.  II-IV  "Legislation  Primitive." 

(b)  "Oeuvres  Completes,"  Paris  1864  (3  vols.) 

Vol.    I    "Demonstration    Philosophique    du    Principe    Consti- 
tutif." 
C.  Bougie,  "Sociologie  de  Proudhon,"  Paris,  1911. 
G.  &  H.  Bourgin,  "Le  Regime  de  I'Industrie  en  France  de  1814  a  1830," 

Paris,  1912. 
Cabet,  "Voyage  en  Icarie,"  Paris,  1848. 
Desjardin,  "P.  J.  Proudhon,  sa  Vie,  ses  Oeuvres  et  sa  Doctrine,"  Paris, 

1896.. 
Diehl,  "P.  J.  Proudhon,  seine  Lehre  und  seine  Leben."    Jena,  1888-1896. 
E.    Fourniere,    "Les    Theories    Socialistcs    au   XIX    Siecle    de    Babeuf    a 

Proudhon,"  Paris,  1904. 
De  Gammond,  "Fourier  et  son  Systeme,"  Paris,  1839. 
Karl  Griin,  "Die  soziale  Bewegung  en  Frankreich  und  Belgien,"  Darm- 
stadt, 1845. 
A.   L.   Guerard,   "French   Civilization  in    the   Nineteenth  Century,"   New 

York,  1914. 
Hayes,  "A  Political  and  Social  History  of  Modern  Europe,"  New  York, 

1917. 
Hegel's  "Werke,"  Berlin,  1834. 

Paul  Janet,  "Saint  Simon  et  la  Saint  Simonisme,"  Paris,  1878. 
Kirkup,  "History  of  Socialism,"  London,  1906. 

E.  Lagarde,  "La  Revanche  de  Proudhon,"  Paris,  1905. 

F.  De  Lamennais,  "Oeuvres   Completes"   II    (Essai  sur  I'indifference  en 

matiere  de  religion),  Paris,  1836-1837. 


I50  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

Laski,  "Authority  in  the  Modern  State,"  New  Haven,  1919. 
Lavcrgne,  "ficonomie  Rurale  dc  la  France  depuis  1789."     Paris,  1860,  first 
edition,   1877   fourth  edition. 

E.  Levasseur,    (a)    Histoire  des   Classes  Ouvrieres   et   de  I'lndustrie   en 

France  avant  1789,"  Paris,  1901. 
(b)   "Histoire   des    Classes   Ouvrieres   ct  de  I'lndustrie   en 

France  de  1789  a  1870,"  Paris  1900-1907  (2  vols.). 
(c)  "Histoire  du  Commerce  de  la  France,"  Paris,   1911- 
1912    (2  vols.). 
De  Maistre,   "Oeuvres  Completes,"   Lyons,   1884-1893    (14  vols.).     Vol.  I 
"£tude    sur   le   Souverainte,"   "Essai   sur   le   Principe   Generateur 
des  Institutions  Politiques." 
Karl  Marx,  "La  Misere  de  la  Philosophic,"  Paris,  1847. 

F.  Miickle,    "Geschichte   der   Sozialistischen    Ideen   im    19   Jahrhundert," 

Leipzig,  1909. 

A.  Miilberger,  (a)  "P.  J.  Proudhon,  Leben  und  Werke,"  Stuttgart,  1899. 
(b)  "Studicn  iiber  Proudhon,"  Stuttgart,  1891. 

F.  A.  Ogg,  "Economic  Development  of  Modern  Europe,"  New  York,  1918. 

H.  L.  Osgood,  "Socialism  and  Anarchism,"  Boston,  U.S.A.  and  London, 
1889. 

J.  L.  Puech,  "La  Proudhonisme  dans  I'Association  Internationale  des 
Travailleurs,"  Paris,    1907. 

Puthtz,  "P.  J.  Proudhon,  sein  Leben  und  seine  positiven  Ideen,"  Berlin, 
1881. 

Saint-Beuve,  "P.  J.  Proudhon,  son  Vie  et  sa  Correspondance,"  Paris,  1872. 
Excellent  work  but  incomplete  (1809-1845). 

Saint-Simon.     "Oeuvres,"  Paris,  1841. 

Sargant,  "Social  Innovators,"  London,  1858. 

S.  Sugenhcim,  "Geschichte  der  Aufhebung  der  Leibeigenschaft  und  Horig- 
keit  in  Europe  bis  urn  die  Mitte  des  19  Jahrhundert,"  St.  Peters- 
burg, 1861. 

L.  R.  Villerme,  "Tableau  de  I'Etat  Physique  et  Moral  des  Ouvriers  Em- 
ployes dans  les  Manufactures  de  Coton,  de  Laine  et  de  Soie," 
Paris,  1840  (2  vols.). 

(2)   Proudhon's  Works.i 
(1)   "Oeuvres  Completes,"  Bruxelles,  1868-1876. 

1837x  "Un  essai  de  gramm.airc  generale"  faisant  suite  aux:  "les 
elements  primitifs  des  langues  decouverts  par  la  comparaison 
des  raison  d'Hebrew  avec  celles  du  Grec,  du  Latin  et  du 
FranCais,"  par  Bergier. 

1  An    "x"    preceding   a    title    signifies    that    the    work    is    not    in    the 
"Oeuvres  Completes." 


Bibliography  .  151 

1838x  "Recherches  sur  les  categories  grammaticles  et  sur  quelques 
origines  de  la  langue  FranCaise"  (written  for  the  Institute  of 
BesanQon  for  the  Volney  prize  but  failed.    Desjardin  I;  p.  24). 

1839  "De  la  celebration  du  dimanche"  ou  "Recherches  sur  le  principe 

du  droit  et  du  gouvemement."    O.C.  II. 

1840  Qu'est-ce  que  la  propriete?     Premier  memoire,  O.C.  I.    (Trans- 

lated by  Tucker,  Philadelphia,  1888). 

1841  Qu'est  ce  que   la  Propriete?     Deuxieme  memoire  ou  "Lettre  a 

M.  Blanqui,"  O.C.I. 

1842  "Avertissement  aux  proprietaires,"  ou  "Lettre  a  M.  Con- 
siderant."     O.C.  II. 

1842  "Explications    presentees    au    ministere    public    sur    le    droit    de 

propriete,"  O.C.  II. 

1843  "De  la  creation  de  I'ordre  dans  I'humanite"  ou  "Principes  d'or- 
ganisation  politique,"  O.C.  III. 

1845    "De  la  concurrence  entre  les  chemins  de  fer  et  les  voies  navi- 
gables,"  O.C.  II. 

1845  "Le  miserere"  ou  "La  penitence  d'un  roi,"  O.C.  II. 

1846  "Systeme  des  contradictions  economiques"  ou  "Philosophie  de  la 
misere."    O.C.  IV  and  V.  (2  vols.). 

1848  "La  solution  du  probleme  social,"  O.C.  VI. 

1848  "L'organisation  du  credit  et  de  la  circulation,"  O.C.  VI. 

1848  "Banque  d'echange,"  O.C.  VI. 

1848  "Banque  du  peuple,"  O.C.  VI. 

1848  "Proposition  relative  a  I'impot  sur  le  revenu,"  O.C.  VII. 

1849x  Idees  revolutionaires.  It  is  composed  of  articles,  selected  by 
Alfred  Darimon  from  "Le  representant  du  peuple"  (Oct.  1847- 
August,  1848)  and  "Le  Peuple"  (Nov.  1848- June,  1849)  Paris. 

1847-1850  "Melanges."  It  is  composed  of  articles  selected  from  "Le 
representant  du  peuple,"  "Le  Peuple"  and  "La  voix  du  peuplef 
(Sept,  1848-1850)  O.C.  XVII,  XVIII  and  XIX  (3  vols.). 

1849  "Les  confessions  d'un  revolutionnaire,  pour  servir  a  I'histoire 
de  la  revolution  de  Fevrier,"  O.C.  XIX. 

1849    "Interet  et  principal,"  O.C.  XIX. 

1851  "Idee  generale  de  la  revolution  au  XlXieme  siecle,"  O.C.  X. 
1851x  "Histoire  generale  de  la  dcmocratie  moderne,"  (See  Desjardin 

I,  pp.  171-172). 

1852  "La  revolution  sociale,  demontree  par  la  coup  d'fitat  du  2 
decembre,"  O.C.  VIL 

1853  Philosophie   du  progres,   O.C.  XX. 


152  The  Political  Theories  of  P.  J.  Proudhon 

1854  "Des  reformes  a  operer  dans  I'exploitation  des  chemins  de  £er 
et  des  consequences  qui  peuvent  en  resulter,  soit  pour  I'augmen- 
tation  du  revenu  des  compagnies,  soit  pour  I'abaissement  des 
prix  de  transport,  I'organisation  de  I'industrie  voituriere  et  la 
constitution  economique  de  la  societe."     O.C.  XII. 

1854     "Manuel   du  speculateur  a  la   bourse,"   O.C.   XI. 

1855x  Projet  d'exposition   perpetuelle. 

1858    Petition  au  senat.  O.C.  XX. 

1858  "De  la  justice  dans  la  revolution  et  dans  I'eglise"  XXI,  XXII, 
XXIII,  XXIV,  XXV,  and  XXVI  (6  vols.)  O.C. 

1858  "La  justice  poursuivie  par  I'eglise,"  O.C.  XX  (Memoire  en 
defense). 

1861     "Theorie  de  I'impot,"  O.  C.  XV. 

1861  "La  guerre  et  la  paix,  recherches  sur  les  principes  et  la  consti- 
tion  du  droit  des  gens."    O.C.  XIII  &  XIV  (2  vols.). 

1862  "Les    majorats    litteraires,    O.C.    XVI. 

1862  "La  federation  et  I'unite  en  Italie,"  O.C.  XVI. 

1862  "Nouvelles  observations  sur  I'unite  Italienne,"  O.C.  XVI. 

1863  Le  principe  federatif   (See  Lagarde,  p.  40).     O.C.  VIII. 
1863  Les  principe  federatif   (See  Lagarde,  p.  40).     O.C.  VIII. 

1863  "Si  les  traites  de  1815  ont  cesse  d'exister,"  O.C.  VIII. 

(2)  "Oeuvres" 

1858    "Amour  et  mariage"  (also  published  in  the  "Oeuvres  Completes, 

vol.  XXIV).    O.  I.  Paris,  1876. 
1854  (?)    "Cesarisme   et    Christianisme"    (2  vols).     O.   II   and  III. 

Paris,  1883. 

(3)  "Oeuvres  Posthumes"  Bruxelles,   1866-1875. 

1862  "Theorie  de  la  propriete,"  written  by  Proudhon  after  1862  (See 
Lagarde,  p.  43)   O.P.  VII. 

1864  "Contradictions  politiques"  ou  "Theorie  du  mouvement  con- 
stitutionel  au  XlXieme  siecle"  commenced  by  Proudhon  in  1864 
and  published  by  his  friend  in  1870.  (Desjardin  II,  p.  75) 
O.P.  I. 

1865  "La  Pornocratie"  ou  "Les  femmes  dans  les  temps  modernes" 
O.P.  II. 

1865    "La  Bible  Annotee"  (2  vols.)  O.P.  Ill  and  IV. 

1865     "France  et  Rhin"  O.P.  V. 

1865  "De  la  capacite  politique  des  classes  ouvrieres,"  vvrritten  by 
Proudhon  in  1865  and  published  by  Dentu  in  the  same  year. 
The  conclusion  of  this  book  was  written  by  Chaudey.  Des- 
jardin II,  p.  69).     O.P.  VI. 

1865     "Du  principe  de  I'art  et  de  destination  socialc"  O.P.  VIII. 


Bibliography  153 

(4)  Correspondance  (14  vols.).     Paris,  1875. 

".  .  .  sa  correspondance  diflfere  notablement  de  ses  livres,  en  ce 
qu'elle  ne  vous  mit  point  martel  en  tete,  elle  vous  place  au 
coeur  de  rhomme,  vous  I'explique  et  vous  laisse  sur  une  im- 
pression d'estime  morale  et  presque  de  securite  intellectuelle. 
On  y  sent  de  la  bonne  foi."    St.  Beuve,  p.  278. 


VITA 

The  author  of  the  foregoing  essay  was  graduated  in  1918  from 
Columbia  College  with  the  degree  of  B.S.  From  1919  to  1922, 
he  pursued  graduate  work  at  Columbia  University,  receiving  the 
degree  of  M.A.  in  1920. 

During  the  year  1919-1920  he  was  the  editor-in-chief  of  the 
Mun  Hey  Weekly  (a  weekly  newspaper  published  by  the  Chinese 
nationalist  party  in  America)  and  also  editor-in-chief  of  the 
Chinese  Political  Science  Quarterly. 


RD 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

RENEWALS  ONLY — TEL.  NO.  642-3405 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 

Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


-f€^ 


^^^■jQ     ^11197Uf 


m^ 


tf. 


iiuxh  1 0  1970 

RECEIVED 


^ '  -^  /-- 


J2 


5  70  -1  f f^ 


UOAN  DEP" 


HeC'DU)    APR 


7-;  ^12 AM 5? 


-'  A  1Q7H 


U 


"F 


JUL  i  D  1979 


It. 


LD21A-60m-6,'69 
(J9096sl0)476-A-32 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


re  78050 


r 


